IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.1 

i     !»  IB   12.2 

■    E  Hi   "■ 

III  i-^s 

III  SB 

^%. 


V 


Hiotographic 

Sdences 

Cbrporation 


# 


iV 


o 


23  WEST  MAIN  STMET 

WiBSTER.N.Y.  USSO 

(716)  872-4503 


6^ 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/iCIVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  IMicroreproductions  /  institi't  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notat/Notes  tachniques  at  bibliographiquas 


Tha  c 
toth« 


Tha  instituta  haa  attamptad  to  obtain  tha  baat 
original  copy  availabia  for  filming.  Faaturaa  of  thia 
copy  which  may  ba  bibliographically  uniqua, 
which  may  altar  any  of  tha  imagaa  in  tha 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
tha  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 


D 
D 


D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagia 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restauria  et/ou  peilicuKe 


I      I    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


I      I   Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  g6ographiques  en  coulaur 

Coloured  inic  (i.e.  other  than  blua  or  blacic)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


I      I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
RbM  avac  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serr6e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  la  long  de  la  marge  intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutAes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  cas  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  filmtes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl6mentaires.- 


L'Institut  a  microfilm*  le  meilleur  exemplaira 
qu'll  lui  a  6tA  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
da  cat  axem(;-<alre  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibllographiqua,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mAthoda  normale  de  f ilmaga 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessous. 


□   Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 


D 
D 
0 
D 
0 


n 


Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagias 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur6as  et/ou  pelliculies 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d6color6es,  tachat^es  ou  piquies 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtach^es 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


Their 
possil 
of  the 
fiimin 


Origir 
begin 
the  la 
sion, 
other 
first  F 
sion. 
or  illu 


I      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


Quality  in^gala  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  material  suppi^mantaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


Theli 
shall  ( 
TINUI 
which 

Maps 

differ 

entire 

begin 

right 

requii 

meth( 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  fauillet  d'errata.  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  film6es  A  nouveau  de  fapon  A 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqui  ci-dessoi*s. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

30X 

y 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  film«d  h«r«  hat  b««n  r«produc«d  thanks 

to  the  ganarosity  of: 

Mills  Mtmorial  Library 
McMutir  Univaraity 


L'axamplaira  film*  ffut  raprodult  grica  A  la 

gAniroaitA  da: 

Milii  iMamorial  Library 
MoMatttr  Univtrsity 


Tha  imagas  appaaring  hara  ara  tha  baat  quality 
possibia  considaring  tha  condition  and  lagibility 
of  tha  original  copy  and  in  kaaping  with  tha 
filming  contract  spacificationa. 


Las  imagas  suivantas  ont  At*  raproduitas  avac  la 
plus  grand  soln,  compta  tanu  da  la  condition  at 
da  la  nattatA  da  l'axamplaira  filmA,  at  an 
conformity  avac  las  conditions  du  contrat  da 
filmaga. 


Original  copias  in  printad  papar  covars  ara  filmad 
beginning  with  tha  front  covar  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printad  or  illustrated  Impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  ara  filmad  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couvarture  en 
papier  est  ImprlmAe  sent  filmte  en  commenqant 
p.ir  la  premier  plat  at  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniAra  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impreasion  ou  d'illustratlon,  solt  par  la  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmte  en  commenqant  par  la 
pramlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impreasion  ou  d'illustratlon  at  en  terminant  par 
la  darnlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ^-  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparattra  sur  la 
derniAre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE".  le 
symbols  y  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  ara  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diegrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  Atre 
filmAs  A  des  taux  da  reduction  diff Arents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grend  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichA,  il  est  film*  A  partir 
de  Tangle  supArieur  gauche,  de  geuche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  la  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaire.  Las  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mAthoda. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

/ 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


• 


The  Foundations: 


A  SERIES  OP  LECTURES 


ON 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


BY 


JOHN  MONRO  GIBSON,  D.D., 

AUTHOR    OP   "THE    AGES    BEFORE    MOSES." 


CHICAGO: 

JANSEN,    McCLURG    &    COMPANY. 

1880. 


COPYRIGHT. 

JANSEN,  McCLURG  &  COMPANY. 
A.  D.  1880. 


STEREOTYPED   AND   PRINTED 
BY 
THE   CHICAQO   LEGAL   NEWS  COMPANY. 


PREFACE. 


The  author  of  these  Lectures  is  well  aware  that 
**  of  making  many  books  "  on  the  Evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity "  there  is  no  end ; "  but,  neither  does  he  see  why 
there  should  be,  until  there  is  an  end  of  infidelity. 
The  present  brief  series  makes  no  pretensions  to  fulness 
of  treatment,  but  it  is  hoped  that  its  general  method 
and  plan,  which  are  believed  to  be  new;  its  attempt  to 
deal  with  phases  of  unbelief  which  are  specially  promi- 
nent at  the  present  time ;  and,  above  all,  its  brevity, 
may  secure  it  a  field  of  usefulness,  and  realize,  in  some 
measure,  the  expectations  of  those  who  have  urged  its 
publication. 

■  ^ 

Chicago,  February,  1880. 


CONTENTS. 


LBOTTJKB  PAQB 

I.    Clearing  the  Ground 11 

GOD  IS. 

II.    The  Witness  Within 29 

III.    The  Witness  Without 43 

Secotttr  ^axt:  CSe©Jief  fflotnei;  Stone, 

GOD  IN  CHRIST, 

rV".      I\EVELATION  OF  GOD  IN  A  HuMAN  LiFE.  61 

V.    Credentials  OF  THE  Christ 74 

VI.    Miracles  op  the  Gospel 88 

VII.    The  Resurrection 104 


8 


CONTENTS. 


GOD  IN  CHRIST  MADE  KNOWN  BY  THE 

SPIRIT. 

VIII.    Revelation  by  the  Spirit 123 

IX.    The  Sixty-  six  Books 136 

X.    Tub  One  Book 164 

<SoncIut)(ttfiarontta£tt: 

THE   TWO    STRONGHOLDS. 

• 

XI.    Tub  Stronghold    op    Unbelief  :    A 

Dogma 173 

XII.    The    Stronghold   op    Faith  :      The 

Christ  op  History 189 


23 
36 
54 


3 


INTRODUCTORY. 


9 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


LECTUEE  I. 


CLEARING  THE  GROUND. 


1 


Christianity  is  its  own  best  evidence.  Give  us 
more  and  more  of  real  Christianity,  and  we  shall 
need  less  and  less  of  its  evidences.  "  Ye  are  my 
witnesses,"  says  Christ  to  His  disciples.  One  truly 
Christian  life  will  do  more  to  prove  the  divine  origin 
of  Christianity  than  many  lectures.  Hence,  it  is  of 
much  greater  importance  to  develop  Christian  char- 
acter than  to  exhibit  Christian  evidences. 

But  it  is  not  right  to  neglect  the  other  altogether. 
Christianity  is  not  merely  a  life,  the  beauty  and 
goodness  of  which  ought  to  be  made  apparent  by 
living  specimens.  It  is  a  history  and  a  doctrine, 
the  truth  of  which  ought  to  be  made  apparent,  as  in 
the  case  of  any  history  or  any  doctrine.  It  carries 
with  it  a  claim  on  the  allegiance  of  all  mankind, 

(11) 


12 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


whicli  claim  ought  by  all  means  to  be  amply  justi- 
fied. Hence  the  importance  of  what  are  called  the 
evidences  of  Christianity. 

The  faith  which  the  Bible  claims  is  not  blind 
faith,  but  intelligent  faith.  "We  are  called  upon  to 
prove  all  things,  and  to  be  ready  always  to  give  to 
every  man  that  asketh  us  a  "reason  of  the  hope  that 
is  in  us,"  and  we  cannot  do  this — the  first  not  at  all, 
the  other  not  thoroughly — ^without  at  least  a  gen- 
eral knowledge  of  the  foundations  of  our  faith. 

In  these  times  especially,  it  is  important  that  this 
subject  should  be  widely  known.  In  former  times 
infidelity  for  the  most  part  took  the  shape  of  simple 
indifi^erence  and  cold  neglect.  Now  it  takes  the 
position  of  open  hostility,  and  we  ought  to  be  ready 
to  meet  it.  Questions  concerning  the  fundamentals 
of  religion  are  no  longer  confined  to  a  few  infidel 
writers  on  the  one  side  and  a  corresponding 
number  of  theologians  on  the  other.  They  are  dis- 
cussed throughout  the  whole  compass  of  our  litera- 
ture. "We  find  such  discussions  in  every  issue  of 
all  the  first-class  reviews,  and  in  almost  every  issue 
of  the  first -class  newspapers. 

If  this  be  so,  why  add  to  the  Babel  of  words? 
Is  not  the  subject  quite  enough  discussed  already? 
But  here  is  the  difiicultv.  Infidel  writers  have  the 
very  easy  task  of  presenting  objections.     Easy  for 


I 


CLEARING  THE   GROUND. 


13 


two  reasons.  First,  an  objection  may  be  presented 
in  a  sentence  or  two;  the  answer  to  it  may  re- 
quire a  column  or  a  pa^e.  It  will  be  at  once  seen 
what  enormous  advantage  this  gives  in  a  news- 
paper controversy  to  the  anti-Christian  side.  But 
besides  this,  an  objection  appeals  to  ignorance;  the 
answer  to  it  must  be  founded  on  knowledge.  How 
much  knowledge  does  it  require  to  see  the  point  of 
such  objections  as  those  which  Colonel  IngersoU 
brings  against  religious  truth?  Are  not  the  most  ig- 
norant people  the  most  apt  to  accept  his  travesties 
as  genuine  arguments  ?  On  the  other  hand,  it  requires 
some  familiarity  with  linguistic  and  literary  and 
historical,  and  even  with  theological  studies,  to  be 
able  fairly  to  appreciate  the  answers  to  such  objec- 
tions even  as  these. 

The  evidences  of  Christianity  are  cumulative. 
They  consist  of  a  vast  mass,  all  converging  to  one 
point,  viz.,  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity.  It  is 
obvious  then. that  it  requires  a  quite  extensive 
knowledge  to  be  able  to  appreciate  the  evidence  in 
its  fulness  and  completeness.  And  it  requires  a 
proportionate  knowledge  to  be  able  to  appreciate  a 
proportionate  amount.  You  can  easily  see,  then, what 
an  easy  task  an  objector  has  with  one  who  is  almost 
ignorant  of  the  subject  in  its  entirety.  Tou  are 
standing  hy  the  side  of  a  great  river.    A  dark  mist 


u 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


is  hanging  over  it,  so  tliat  you  cannot  see  the  direc- 
tion in  which  it  is  flowing.  Close  beside  you,  near 
enough  to  see  by  peering  down  into  it,  your  atten- 
tion is  called  to  a  little  stream  flowing  north.  So 
"  the  river  flows  north,"  you  are  told.  "  Yes,  I 
see  it  does."  Yet  all  the  while  the  majestic  river 
is  flowing  south,  and  that  is  only  a  little  eddy.  But 
before  you  can  be  convinced  that  its  course  is  really 
southward,  it  will  be  necessary  that  the  mist  be 
raised  from  a  large  part  of  the  stream.  If  the  mist 
had  not  been  there,  if  the  broad  expanse  of  the 
stream  had  been  full  in  your  view,  it  would  have 
been  impossible  to  lead  you  astray  by  pointing  to 
the  little  eddy.  And  so  it  is  with  many  to  whose 
minds  the  little  eddies  of  apparent  contradiction  are 
so  easily  presented.  If  they  only  saw  ths  vast  stream 
of  truth  flowing  majestically  and  mightily  on,  they 
would  not  be  disturbed  by  these  little  counter-cur- 
rents. But  they  do  not ;  and  the  reason  why  they  do 
not  is  simply  because  they  have  never  made  them- 
selves acquainted  with  the  evidences.  The  subject 
is  too  large  ever  to  be  presented  at  all  comprehens- 
ively even  in  the  reviews,  far  less  in  the  newspapers; 
and  as  for  books  on  the  subject,  few  have  the  time, 
even  if  they  had  the  inclination,  to  read  them. 

The  object  of  this  course  of  lectures  is  to  present, 
in  as  brief  and  comprehensive  a  form  as  possible,  a 


CLEARING   THE   GEOUND. 


15 


general  view  of  this  extensive  subject,  so  as  to  sup- 
ply for  those  who  may  need  it,  at  least  a  framework  on 
which  knowledge  derived  from  subsequent  reading 
and  reflection  may  be  worked  in ;  and  so  as  to  show 
that,  though  there  are  many  questions  about  Chris- 
tianity which  it  is  hard,  and  some  of  which  it  may 
be  impossible,  to  answer,  there  are  so  many,  many 
things  to  be  said  in  its  favor  that  any  reasonable 
man  who  has  them  in  view  may  "  know  the  cer- 
tainty" "of  those  things  which  are  most  surely  be- 
lieved among  us." 

All  that  I  propose  to  do  at  present  is  to  clear  the 
ground  for  the  foundations,  by  ofibring  some  pre- 
liminary considerations.  Some  of  these  have  been 
slightly  referred  to  in  what  has  already  been  said: 
but  they  are  of  sufficient  importance  to  justify  an 
articulate  and  distinct  statement. 

1.  The  subject  does  not  admit  of  mathematical 
demonstration.  Is  this  an  acknowledgment  of 
weakness,  to  begin  with?  By  no  means.  Math- 
ematical demonstration  is  out  of  the  question  in 
all  departments  of  real  knowledge,  i,  e.,  our  know- 
ledge of  persons  and  things.  Its  form  is  this :  "  Sup- 
posing this  to  be  so  and  so,  then  that  will  necessarily 
follow."  But  it  never  can  say:  "This  or  that  is  so 
and  so."  Every  student  of  mathematics  knows  that 
it  is  of  no  great  consequence  whether  he  draw  his 


16 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


figure  well  or  ill.  His  right-angled  triangle  may  be 
any  number  of  degrees  off  the  square,  and  his 
straight  lines  may  be  very  shaky  and  crooked.  No 
matter,  the  demonstration  comes  out  all  the  same. 
Why  ?  Because  he  is  not  demonstrating  anything 
about  the  figure  actually  before  him,  or  any  figure 
that  he  knows  to  exist,  but  about  a  figure  in  his 
mind  constructed  from  a  definition  that  has  been 
laid  down  in  the  beginning.  All  that  he  proves 
is:  ''Suppose  the  figure  to  be  so  and  so,  then  so 
and  so  will  follow."  When  we  have  the  liberty  to 
make  our  own  premises,  then  of  course  we  may 
draw  our  conclusions  with  mathematical  certainty; 
but  in  dealing  with  realities  we  cannot  make  our 
own  premises;  we  must  accept  the  facts  as  we 
find  them,  and  when  we  reach  certainty  it  can- 
not be  mathematical,  but  what  is  called  moral 
certainty.  Now  the  distinction  between  mathe- 
matical and  moral  certainty  lies  here:  mathemat- 
ical certainty  is  the  result  of  a  single  line  of  evi- 
dence, of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  irresistible  to 
any  mind  capable  of  following  it.  Moral  certainty 
is  the  result  of  a  number  of  converging  lines  of  evi- 
dence, none  of  which  may  be  absolutely  convincing 
in  itself,  but  which  taken  together  claim  the  belief  of 
reasonable  men,  and  form  a  sufficient  basis  for  duty. 
Now,  it  is  of  great  importance  to  remember  that  it 


CLEARING  THE   GROUND. 


IT 


is  on  moral  and  not  on  mathematical  certainty  that 
all  our  substantial  beliefs  are  founded.  It  is  not 
possible  to  demonstrate  gravitation,  yet  we  surely 
believe  it.  It  is  not  possible  to  demonstrate  that 
the  sun  will  rise  to-morrow,  yet  we  surely  expect  it. 
It  is  not  possible  to  demonstrate  that  it  is  wrong  to 
steal,  yet  we  do  not  scruple  to  punish  the  man  that 
does  it.  All  that  we  ask  in  other  departments  of 
thought  and  action  is  reasonable  grounds  for  our 
faith ;  and  why  should  we  ask  more  in  religion  ?  Let 
us  then,  by  all  means,  look  for  the  converging  lines 
of  moral  demonstration,  and  not  for  any  single  line 
of  mathematical  demonstration. 

2.  Our  second  consideration  is  the  consequence 
of  the  first.  It  is  this  :  That  we  are  by  no  means 
bound  to  answer  all  the  difficulties  that  may  be  pre- 
sented as  we  travel  along  the  different  lines  of  proof. 
In  a  mathematical  demonstration  there  are  no  diffi- 
culties and  no  room  for  objections.  Why?  Because 
the  whole  question  lies  within  such  easy  compass. 
Dealing,  as  the  demonstration  does,  not  with  real 
things,  but  only  with  certain  supposed  cases  origin- 
ating in  the  mind  itself,  we  are  easily  master«5  of  the 
whole  field.  We  have  the  beginning,  middle  and 
end  of  it  within  the  compass  of  our  own  minds. 
But  as  soon  as  we  pass  out  of  our  own  minds  and 
deal  with  real  things,  as  in  science,  the  case  is  en- 
2 


18 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


tirely  altered,  as  is  apparent  from  the  fact  that, 
while  all  good  mathematicians  agree,  the  best  of 
doctors  may  differ ;  and  what  is  true  of  the  doc- 
tors is  true  of  all  scientific  men,  as  well  as  theolog- 
ians. Now,  the  field  which  is  covered  by  the  Chris- 
tian religion  is  as  broad  as  the  universe  and  as  long 
as  eternity,  for  God,  whom  it  reveals,  is  the  Crea- 
tor of  all  worlds,  and  His  purposes,  which  it  pro- 
fesses in  part  to  unfold,  stretch  far  beyond  the  lim- 
its of  passing  time.  Kather  a  wide  scope  for  objec- 
tions, you  see.  And  it  would  be  passing  strange  if 
even  a  feeble  mind  could  not  gather  a  sufficiently 
formidable  array.  To  answer  all  possible  objections 
would  require  omniscience.  Let  us  never,  there- 
fore be  so  foolish  as  to  undertake  to  solve  all  diffi- 
culties. Never  let  what  you  do  not  know  disturb 
what  you  do  know.  Enough  to  have  sufficient  pos- 
itive evidence  for  believing  what  we  do  believe, 
without  our  troubling  ourselves  about  answering 
all  the  difficulties  which  lie  along  the  line  of  our  be- 
lief. It  must  surely  be  a  great  mistake  to  allow  an 
appeal  to  our  ignorance  to  have  greater  weight  than 
an  appeal  to  our  intelligence.  Let  us,  then,  not  be 
disturbed  by  difficulties,  so  long  as  our  positive 
proof  is  sufficiently  strong. 

3.  Be  careful  to  distinguish  between  links  and 
strands  of  evidence,  and  do  not  allow  our  strands 


iiii. 


CLEARING  THE  GEOUND. 


19 


to  be  treated  as  if  they  were  mere  links.  The 
strength  of  a  chain  is  the  strength  of  its  weakest 
link.  But  the  strength  of  a  rope  is  not  the  strength 
of  its  weakest  strand.  It  is  the  united  strength  of 
all  of  them.  Here  is  a  chain -cable  warranted  to 
hold  an  ocean  steamship.  "Will  it  hold?  Eight  in 
the  middle  of  it  is  a  weak  link  that  would  not  bear 
the  strain  of  a  single  ton.  No  matter  how  strong 
the  other  links  may  be,  it  is  plain  that  tliat  ca- 
ble will  not  hold.  Here  again  is  a  huge  rope. 
Will  it  hold?  Suppose  you  take  one  of  the  many 
fibres  of  which  it  is  wrought  and  show  it  will  not 
bear  tlie  strain  of  one  pound  weight.  Does  that 
prove  the  rope  will  not  hold?  By  no  means.  It  de- 
pends on  how  many  such  fibres  are  wrought  together 
to  make  the  one  rope.  !N"ow,  if  you  consider  for 
a  moment,  you  will  see  how  unfair  it  would  be,  in 
order  to  show  that  the  rope  would  not  hold,  to  take 
each  of  its  pieces  separately,  and  say:  There  is 
something  in  this  strand,  but  not  sufficient  to  bear 
the  strain,  so  it  must  be  set  aside:  and  so  to  go  on 
from  strand  to  strand  until  the  entire  rope  was  con- 
demned. But  that  is  just  the  way  that  most  infi- 
del writers  deal  with  the  evidences  of  Christianity. 
There  are  very  many  lines  of  proof.  They  take  up 
each  line  by  itself,  and  while  they  cannot  but  admit 
that  there  is  some  force  in  it,  they  say  (and  pos- 


20 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


I' 


sibly  they  may  be  right  in  saying  it  sometimes) 
that  there  is  not  force  enough  to  bear  the  strain  of 
the  mighty  claim  that  Christianity  makes  on  our 
faith  and  allegiance.  And  what  then  ?  Why,  they 
set  it  aside  altogether,  and,  in  dealing  afterwards 
with  the  other  lines  of  evidence,  they  allow  it  no 
force  at  all.  Is  not  that  glaringly  unjust  ?  Remem- 
ber I  make  no  charge  here,  or  anywhere  else  through- 
out these  lectures,  of  intentional  dishonesty.  There 
are  many  who  deal  unfairly  in  their  arguments  who 
are  perfectly  honest  in  their  intent.  But  the  unfair- 
ness is  r  ne  the  less  real  on  that  account. 

The  illustration  of  the  rope  is  good  enough  so  far 
as  it  goes,  but  it  does  not  go  far  enough,  as  a 
moment's  thought  will  show,  A  rope  of  say  three 
equal  strands  has  three  times  the  strength  of  e*».ch  of 
them.  But  has  a  three-fold  line  of  evidence  just 
three  times  the  strength  of  each  line?  No;  it  has 
immeasurably  more.  Take  the  simple  case  of  in- 
dependent witnesses.  The  testimony  of  one  man 
gives  a  certain  degree  of  probability.  Does  the 
testimony  of  a  second  quite  independent  witness 
only  double  the  probability?  No;  it  indefinitely  in- 
creases it.  And  if  a  third  independent  witness  should 
testify  to  the  same  fact,  we  should  in  all  ordinary 
cases  accept  it  as  conclusive.  Now  consider  whether 
it  would  be  fair  to  say,  "  The  first  man  may  be  mis- 


i^ 


CLEARING   THE   GROUND. 


21 


taken,  or  may  be  untruthful,  bo  you  cannot  accept 
his  statement  as  settling  the  matter,  and  accordingly 
he  must  be  set  aside;"  and  then,  having  disposed 
of  the  second  and  third  in  precisely  the  same  way, 
to  sum  up  by  saying:  "I  have  proved  that  not 
one  of  all  the  three  viritnesses  is  conclusive,  so  your 
case  is  dismissed."  Is  there  a  lawyer  in  all  the  land 
that  would  justify  such  treatment  of  evidence?  Yet 
it  is  done  all  the  time  in  dealing  with  the  many 
independent  lines  of  Christian  evidence;  and  we 
must  not  allow  it. 

4.  "Where  the  links  in  the  evidence  are  success- 
ive, be  sure  to  take  them  in  the  right  order.  A 
pyramid  is  the  most  stable  of  all  structures ;  but 
even  a  pyramid  will  not  stand  upon  its  apex.  The 
most  skilful  builder  cannot  build  a  house  by  be- 
ginning at  the  second  story.  Now,  it  is  true  that 
those  who  wait  upon  the  Lord  may  "mount  up 
with  wings  as  eagles,"  and  so  there  are  multitudes 
of  Christians  who  have  attained  to  the  very  heights 
of  Christian  experience  without  climbing  up  the 
stairway  of  the  Christian  evidences.  But  when  we 
wish  to  exhibit  the  solidity  of  the  Christian  temple, 
we  must  begin  at  the  foundation  and  go  up  by 
plain  and  strong  steps.  You  will  find  persons  that 
are  foolish  enough  to  stake  the  entire  system  of 
Christianity  on  the  interpretation  of  some  partic- 


22 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


iilar  text  of  Scripture.  "When  somo  old  idea  that 
lias  long  been  attached  to  it  has  been  exploded, 
they  begin  to  tremble  as  if  the  very  foundations 
were  giving  way.  The  foundation  of  their  faith 
was  the  verbal  inspiration  of  the  entire  Bible,  from 
the  beginning  of  Genesis  to  the  end  of  Revelation, 
so  that  a  doubt  attaching  to  a  sentence  or  even  a 
sinorle  word  is  sufficient  to  fill  them  with  alarm. 
Now  it  is  quite  evident  that  this  is  not  a  desirable 
position  for  any  one  to  hold.  I  here  pronounce  no 
opinion  on  the  question  of  the  nature  or  degree  of 
inspiration.  I  only  object  to  this  or  any  theory  of 
inspiration  being  made  the  foundation  on  which 
the  whole  structure  of  Christianity  is  supposed  to 
rest,  the  ultimate  fiict  beyond  which  we  cannot  go. 
There  are  three  main  stages  in  the  inquiry  before 
us.  There  is,  first,  the  being  of  God  ;  second,  the 
revelation  of  God  in  Christ ;  and  last,  the  record 
of  that  revelation  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  sacred 
Scriptures.  I^ow,  it  is  true  that,  in  a  certain  sense, 
the  last  is  first  and  the  first  last.  We  open  the 
Scriptures  to  learn  of  Christ,  and  we  study  Christ 
to  know  God.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  the  way  to 
the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  the  way  to  the  Father. 
"Through  Him  we  all  have  access  by  one  Spirit  to 
the  Father."  But  in  building  the  foundations,  it 
will  not  do  to  invert  the  order.    The  existence  of 


■-■  A- 
'■A 


CLEARING  THE  GROUND. 


88 


God  must  be  a  settled  matter  before  you  raise  the 
question  whether  lie  revealed  Himself  in  Christ. 
And  so,  too,  wo  must  find  some  evidence  that 
Christ  was  what  He  claimed  to  be,  before  we  can 
be  assured  of  the  certain  truth  of  what  lie  said 
about  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  sacred  Scriptures. 

The  true  order  then  is  God,  Christ,  the  Bible. 
And  that  is  the  order  we  propose  to  follow  in  these 
lectures.  It  will  be  understood  from  what  we  have 
said  concerning  the  vast  range  of  the  subject,  that 
we  have  no  idea  of  being  able  to  present  it  in 
its  completeness.  All  we  can  do  is  to  give  an 
indication  of  the  kind  of  argument  by  which  the 
truth  of  Christianity  is  made  apparent  to  those  who 
honestly  and  earnestly  inquire  into  it.  We  shall 
first  show  some  of  the  reasons  for  believing  that 
God  exists.  At  this  stage  of  the  inquiry  the  Bible 
will  not  be  used  as  evidence  at  all.  We  shall  next 
show  some  of  the  reasons  for  believing  that  God  has 
revealed  Himeelf  in  His  Son  Christ  Jesus.  At  this 
stage  of  the  inquiry,  the  books,  which  when  bound 
together  are  called  the  Bible,  will  be  used,  but  sim- 
ply as  books  by  human  authors,  and,  dealt  with  ac- 
cording to  the  laws  of  evidence.  We  shall  not  beg 
the  question  of  their  inspiration.  We  shall  then 
show  some  of  the  reasons  for  believing  that  we  have 
a  record  of  this  revelation  and  of  all  that  it  is  nee- 


24 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


II 


essary  for  us  to  know  in  regard  to  the  preparations 
for  it  and  results  of  it,  a  record  which  is  not 
only  generally  correct,  but  on  which  we  can  rely 
because  the  men  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  it 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Af- 
ter honestly  and  candidly  pursuing  such  a  line  of 
inquiry  as  this,  we  believe  a  candid  mind  should 
have  no  difficulty  in  reaching  an  intelligent  convic- 
tion that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taments are  really  "given  by  inspiration  of  God 
and  are  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  cor- 
rection, for  instruction  in  righteousness;"  and  when 
we  reach  this  point,  the  evidences  of  Christianity 
have  fully  served  their  end.  Tlie  foundation s  firmly 
laid,  we  are  ready  to  enter  the  temple  and  worship. 

Eemember,  however,  in  conclusion,  that  while  it 
is  very  desirable  to  be  acquainted  with  the  evi- 
dences of  Christianity,  both  in  order  to  prove  all 
things  for  ourselves  that  we  may  "  hold  fast  that 
which  is  good,"  and  also  that  we  may  be  able  to 
"  give  to  ever}''  man  a  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  in 
us,"  it  is  not  necessary  to  know  them  in  order  to 
know  Christ  and  be  assured  of  His  salvation.  There 
is  the  sure  and  easy  path  of  personal  experience, 
which  is  open  to  all.  It  may  take  a  learned  man  to 
set  forth  the  reasons  why  bread  is  good,  but  a  hun- 
gry man  need  not  wait  till  the  lecture  is  done  before 


CLEARING   THE   GROUND, 


25 


he  tries  it.  "  O  taste  and  see  that  God  is  good." 
And  yet  there  is  one  thing  more,  the  unspeak- 
able importance  of  the  spirit  in  which  you  approach 
this  subject,  whether  by  way  of  the  evidences  or 
by  the  way  of  personal  trial.  You  must  come  in 
the  spirit  of  "  meekness  and  fear."  F^'rst,  meek- 
ness. If  you  are  vain  in  your  own  conceit,  all  will 
be  vain.  The  gate  of  the  kingdom  is  humility. 
And  then,  fear.  It  must  be  in  no  light  and  trifling 
spirit  that  you  come.  It  is  for  your  life.  Come, 
then,  in  meekness  and  fear.  Seek  humbly  and 
earnestly,  and  you  will  not  seek  in  vain. 


FIRST  PART. 


THE  BED  ROCK, 


H 


LECTUEE  II. 


THE   WITNESS  WITHIN. 


The  Being  of  God  is  the  underlying  foundation 
of  all  religion.  "We  propose,  accordingly,  to  begin 
by  giving  some  of  the  many  reasons  for  believing 
that  God  is.  This  is,  at  present,  the  thick  of  the 
fight  between  the  believer  and  the  unbeliever.  In 
former  times,  among  English-speaking  people,  the 
alternative  was  Deism  or  Christianity.  Infidelity 
meant  the  rejection  of  Christ,  while  the  belief  in 
God  was  supposed  still  to  remain,  and  to  be  all- 
sufficient  for  religious  purposes.  But  the  deistic 
position  is  now  practically  abandoned.  It  is  aban- 
doned entirely  by  the  leaders,  and,  though  a  good 
many  of  the  rank  and  file  of  infidelity  hold  the  old 
position  still,  they  hold  it  in  a  very  vague  kind  of 
way,  and  make  no  attempt  worth  speaking  of  to 
defend  it.  The  great  question  is  not  now  as  be- 
tween God  in  Christ  and  God  out  of  Christ,  God  in 
the  world  and  God  out  of  the  world,  but  between 
God  and  no  God;  or  to  put  it  more  accurately,  be- 

(29) 


30 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


tween  those  who  say  that  the  heavens  and  the  earth, 
and  all  that  are  in  them  declare  the  glory  of  God, 
and  those  who  leave  it  an  entirely  open  question 
whether  there  be  a  God  or  not.  Plence  the  special 
importance,  in  these  times,  of  this  part  of  the  argu- 
ment. 

Hemember  at  the  outset  that  the  claim  to  know 
God  does  not  mean  to  comprehend  Him.  We  do 
not  even  comprehend  one  another.  We  know  one 
another,  and  even  ourselves,  only  in  part.  But, 
though  I  may  know  you  only  very  partially,  that 
is  no  reason  for  doubting  that  I  know  your  exist- 
ence, and  something  about  you  besides.  You  see 
how  careful  the  Apostle  is  in  this  regard.  He  says, 
"That  which  maybe  known  of  God,  is  manifest," 
implying  that  there  is  very  much  we  may  not 
know;  but  that  casts  no  discredit  whatever  on  the 
little  we  do  know. 

But,  though  our  means  of  knowing  God  are  nec- 
essarily limited,  yet  the  subject  is  so  extensive  that 
it  would  be  presumptuous  to  attempt,  after  any 
fashion,  anything  like  a  complete  presentation  of 
it.  All  we  can  hope  to  do  is  to  indicate  the  main 
lines  of  evidence,  and  give  some  idea  of  the  manner 
In  which  each  of  them  contributes  to  the  conclu- 
jion,    which  all   of   them  taken  together  render 


abundantly  certain. 


THE   WITNESS   WITHIN. 


31 


The  knowledge  of  God  is  borne  in  upon  us  on 
every  side  of  our  many-sided  nature.  We  are  bound 
to  the  great  Author  of  our  being  by  a  manifold  cord 
which,  if  carefully  analyzed,  would  be  found  to 
consist  of  very  many  strands.  But  as  our  limits 
forbid  any  attempt  at  minute  analysis,  we  propose 
to  consider  the  cable  as  consisting  of  four  great 
strands.  Whether  or  not  there  be  any  suggestive- 
ness  in  the  four-fold  distribution  of  the  powers  with 
which  we  are  called  upon  to  worship  God,  "  Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and 
with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  strength,  and 
with  all  thy  mind,"  we  shall  not,  I  think,  go  far 
astray,  if  we  say  that  in  man's  complex  nature  we 
can  distinguish  intellect,  conscience,  heart,  and  soul 
(the  meaning  of  the  dubious  word  "  soul"  to  be  after- 
ward explained).  Each  one  of  these  has  its  own 
witness  to  the  being  of  God. 

]^ow,  before  we  examine  the  witnesses,  let  us  see 
if  we  know  anything  as  to  their  truthfulness.  If 
the  testimony  be  clear,  can  we  accept  it  as  true? 
It  seems  to  me  that  the  only  possible  answer  is, 
that  w^e  must.  If  our  very  nature  is  a  lie,  it  is  of  no 
use  to  inquire  after  truth  on  any  subject  whatever. 
We  must  then  accept  as  trustworthy  the  faculties 
with  which  we  find  ourselves  endowed,  and  which  are 
the  only  means  we  have  of  ascertaining  truth.     And 


32 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


be  it  remembered  this  applies  to  them  all  alike.  It  is 
evidently  irrational  to  suppose  that  we  may  dis- 
credit one  part  of  our  nature  and  be  quite  sure  of 
another.  Of  course  every  part  of  our  nature  is  liable 
to  error.  But  this  error  to  which  we  are  liable  can- 
not be  supposed  to  come  from  our  original  constitu- 
tion, else  it  would  be  impossible  ever  to  recognize 
it  as  error,  and  equally  impossible  to  correct  it. 
We  may  err  through  ignorance,  or  through  careless- 
ness, or  through  weakness;  but  we  cannot  suppose 
that  the  source  of  the  error  can  lie  in  the  faculty 
itself,  for  to  suppose  this  would  be  to  render  knowl- 
edge on  any  -siibject  utterly  uncertain.  This  is 
generally  admitted  so  far  as  the  intellect  is  con- 
cerned. Notwithstanding  the  many  errors  of  think- 
ing into  which  all  men  are  apt  to  fall,  hardly  any 
ever  suppose  tliat  the  laws  of  thinking  are  a  delu- 
sion and  a  snare.  We  must  accept  as  true,  that 
which  the  intellect  decides  to  be  true,  inasmuch  as 
there  are  no  other  possible  means  of  deciding  it. 
But  the  very  same  principle  applies  to  the  decisions 
of  the  conscience  and  of  the  heart.  There  are  many 
of  those  who  have  absolute  confidence  in  the  human 
intellect,  who  have  little  faith  in  the  conscience,  and 
none  in  the  heart.  But  is  it  not  as  plain  as  day, 
that  if  we  are  so  constituted  that  our  conscience  will 
lie  to  us,  it  is  just  as  likely  that  our  intellect  will 


THE   WITNESS   WITHIN. 


83 


do  the  same?  If  the  love  which  we  find  in  our 
hearts  be  a  delusion  and  a  snare,  why  may  not  the 
laws  of  logic,  which  we  find  in  our  mental  constitu- 
tion, be  equally  a  delusion  and  a  snare?  The  man 
who  will  meditate  a  lie  will  look  a  lie;  and  if  he 
can  look  a  lie  he  may  also  act  a  lie;  and  if  he  can 
act  a  lie  you  cannot  trust  him  not  to  tell  a  lie.  If 
a  man  is  a  liar  at  all,  you  cannot  trust  him  in  any- 
thing. And  so  is  it  with  our  faculties.  We  must 
trust  them  all,  or  we  cannot  put  confidence  in  any 
of  them. 

"We  shall  begin  with  the  witness  of  the  heart. 
Here  we  find  deep-rooted  in  our  nature  a  sense  of 
dependence  on  a  Superior  Being,  and  certain  affec- 
tional  longings  and  aspirations  reaching  out  toward 
Him.  Augustine  but  expressed  the  sentiment  of 
humanity,  except  in  so  far  as  it  has  been  overlaid 
by  sin  or  starved  by  neglect,  when  he  said:  *'  Thou 
hast  made  the  heart  for  Thyself,  and  it  is  ever  rest- 
less until  it  finds  its  rest  in  Thee."  As  a  rule, 
our  infidel  friends  are  not  disposed  to  contradict  ns 
here.  They  say:  "All  right;  that  is  just  where 
religion  belongs;  it  is  a  matter  of  sentiment,  of 
emotion."  And  by  saying  this  they  think  they 
hav^^  cast  some  doubt  upon  its  reality.  Xow,  it  is 
true  tii.at  pur  passing  sentiments  and  emotions  can 
never  be  a  standard  of  reality;  but  to  say  that  a 
3 


84 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


deep-seated  abiding  sentiment  of  the  human  heart 
is  a  falseliood,  is  to  impeach  our  entire  nature,  and 
make  it  impossible  to  trust  any  part  of  it.  What 
if  this  deep-rooted  sense  of  relation  to  a  Superior 
Being  be,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  a  mere  instinct; 
is  that  any  reason  why  we  are  to  suppose  it  a  lie? 
Is  it  a  common  thing  for  instincts  to  lie?  Do  you 
know  of  a  single  case  in  which  instinct  in  the 
animal  kingdom  has  been  proved  to  be  a  lie?  Then 
what  good  ground  have  you  for  supposing  that "  the 
instinct  of  prayer,"  if  it  be  only  an  instinct,  is  a 
lie? 

There  have  been  those  who  have  felt  the  power 
of  this  witness  to  be  so  great  that  they  considered 
it  not  only  sufficient  to  stand  alone  without  support 
from  any  other,  but  evc/i  against  what  seemed  the 
contradiction  of  all  the  others.  Tliis  is  the  kev-note 
of  a  large  part  of  Tennyson's  "  In  Memoriam,"  as, 
for  example,  in  this  passage: 

**  If  e'er,  when  Faith  had  fallen  asleep, 
I  heard  a  voice,  '  Believe  no  more,* 
And  heard  an  ever- breaking*  shoro 
That  tumbled  in  the  Godless  deep; 

A  warmth  within  the  breast  would  melt 

The  freezing  reason's  colder  part; 

And,  like  a  man  in  wrath,  the  heart 
Stood  up  and  answered,  '  I  have  felt.'  '* 


TUE   WITNESS   WITHIN. 


85 


And  yet  it  is  quite  common  for  infidel  writers  to 
treat  the  witness  of  the  heart  as  not  onlv  of  no 
force  at  all,  but  as  rather  tending  to  discredit  tlie 
reality  of  that  which  it  attests!  Whether  that  be 
a  rational  mode  of  procedure  I  am  quite  willing  to 
to  leave  to  your  good  judgment.  I  have  faith,  you 
see,  in  the  trustworthiness  of  your  faculties. 

Take  next  the  witness  of  the  soul.  Let  me  ex- 
plain what  I  mean  by  soul.  If  you  and  your  dog 
stand  on  "Table  Eock"  and  look  off  at  Niagara, 
the  two  pairs  of  eyes  probably  see  much  alike.  But 
if  you  be  a  man  of  any  soul,  j^ou  will  see  immeasur- 
ably more  than  your  dog  sees.  I  am  not  denying 
that  in  a  certain  sense  a  dog  has  a  soul.  That  is  a 
mere  matter  of  the  meaning  of  the  w^ord.  The  soul 
I  am  speaking  of  now,  is  what  the  dog  has  not,  and 
you  have.  Perhaps  we  might  have  called  it  imag- 
ination, but  BO  many  people  think  that  the  imagin- 
ation has  only  to  do  with  imaginary  things,  that 
its  associations  are  misleading.  AVhat  we  refer  to 
is  that  faculty  which  recosjnizes  the  beautiful  and 
sublime  in  nature,  images  the  perfect  in  life,  and 
takes  hold,  so  to  speak,  of  the  skirt  of  the  Infinite. 
That  this  is  a  hona  fide  faculty  of  the  human  soul 
no  one  will  deny,  though  on  account  of  sadly  pre- 
valent neglect  and  starvation  it  is  reduced  to  very 
small  dimensions  in  most  men.     Still*,  it  is  a  facul- 


i 


86 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


I 


ty  of  the  Boul,  aiulj  as  such,  we  cannot  supposo  it  to 
bo  an  utter  delusion.  There  luive  been  skeptics 
who  have  been  bold  enough  to  say  so.  One,  in 
particular,  has  gone  the  length  of  casting  ridicule 
on  men's  admiration  of  the  starry  heavens,  which 
he  characterizes  as  a  "luminous  eruption,  no  more 
worthy  of  wonder  than  an  eruption  in  man,  or  a 
swarm  of  flies;"  but  I  doubt  if  any  of  us  is  so  hope- 
lessly prosaic  as  to  agree  to  this.  Now,  unless  this 
feeling  of  wonder  and  awe  be  entirely  false  and 
misleading,  it  must  point  us  to  One  above  us,  in 
whom  all  .our  ideals  are  realized  and  always  abide. 
I  know  that  to  most  people  this  witness  is  but  a 
faint  one,  but  it  is  not  from  any  defect  in  itself,  but 
simply  because  this  is  a  part  of  our  nature  that  is 
more  neglected  than  any  other. 

On  the  other  hand,  here  again,  as  in  the  former 
case,  you  will  find  minds  that  can  rest  in  it,  as  in  it- 
self all  sufficient  and  irresistible.  As  an  illustra- 
tion, read  once  more  Coleridge's  "  Hymn  before 
Sunrise  in  the  Yalley  of  Chamonix."  By  the  bye, 
what  utter  nonsense  that  much  admired  hymn  must 
be,  if  there  is  no  force  in  this  witness  of  the  soul 
to  God!  ' 

"We  come,  in  the  third  place,  to  the  witness  of  the 
conscience,  with  its  irresistible  conviction  of  obli- 
gation and  responsibility.     Obedience  is  due  to 


THE   WITNESS   WITHIN. 


87 


superiors;  and  why  iim  I  summoned  to  obey,  if 
there  be  no  Superior  IJeing  to  whom  my  obedienco 
is  due?  AVhy  do  I  talk  of  responsibility  if  there 
is  no  one  to  answer  to?  Can  it  be  that  my  very 
conscience,  the  best  of  me,  is  a  lie? 

Here,  again,  there  have  been  those  among  our 
most  distinguished  philosophers  who  have  rested 
the  evidence  for  the  being  of  God  on  this  alone. 
Kant  is  probably  the  most  illustrious  of  these.  By 
his  critical  philosophy  he  was  led  to  discredit  the 
other  witneisses,  but  when  he  came  to  this  witness, 
he  found  it  absolutely  invulnerable  to  criticism, 
and  announced  it  accordingly  as  a  sufficient  basis 
for  faith,  even  though  all  the  others  were  silenced. 
"We  believe  that  his  critical  method  was  unfairly 
oritical,  and  that,  after  all  his  criticisms,  the  evidence 
of  all  the  witnesses  stands  as  good  as  ever;  but  it 
is  something  to  know  that  such  unsparing,  relentless 
criticism  was  powerless  to  weaken  in  the  slightest 
degree,  even  in  his  own  estimation,  the  mighty 
witness  of  Conscience  to  the  being  of  God. 

We  take  the  witness  of  the  intellect  last,  because 
it  is  the  most  important;  not,  indeed,  on  account 
of  any  admitted  superiority  of  the  intellect  to  the 
other  faculties  of  the  soul,  but  because  the  great 
bulk  of  the  discussion  is  carried  on  in  this  region. 
And  here  we  shall  pass  by  the  so-called  a  jpriori 


38 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


proofs,  because  it  is  only  those  who  are  well  ac- 
customed to  abstract  metaphysical  discussions  who 
can  appreciate  the  force  that  may  be  in  them.  And 
there  is  great  abundance  without  them. 

It  is  one  of  the  laws  of  our  intellectual  nature 
that  we  cannot  tliink  of  any  tiling  beginning  to  ex- 
ist without  a  cause.  We  are  continually  inquiring 
into  the  causes  of  things.  And  we  are  making  large 
progress  in  the  discovery  of  causes.  But  all  the 
causes  we  have  yet  discovered  by  our  search  are 
themselves  effects.  They,  in  their  turn,  began  to 
exiKi]  and  hence  a  cause  must  be  sought  for  them 
too,  And  so  the  mind  is  led  back,  and  back,  and  can 
find  no  rest  until  it  reaches  the  great  first  Cause. 
The  only  way  to  escape  the  force  of  this  reasoning  is 
to  hold  the  eternity  of  the  universe;  to  deny  that  the 
universe,  as  a  whole,  ever  began  to  exist;  in  which 
case  it  is  not  necessary  to  seek  a  cause  back  of  the 
universe  itself.  But  besides  the  great  difficulty  of 
believing  that,  the  universe  of  matter  is  eternal,  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  the  recent  investigations  of 
science  aH  point  in  the  direction  of  a  beginning. 
The  evidences  against  the  eternity  of  the  universe 
are  multiplying  every  year,  and  strengthening  the 
necessity  for  a  great  first  Cause  "  in  the  beginning." 

Now  the  only  way  possible  for  us  to  conceive  of 
a  first  cause  at  all  clearly  is  to  regard  it  as  will — 


THE    WITNESS    WITHIN. 


39 


the  will  of  a  free  agent.  "We  have  said  that  the 
causes  which  science  discloses  are  all  tlieniselves 
effects.  But  there  is  one  set  of  causes,  and  only 
one  that  we  know,  that  have  no  appearance  of  being 
effects,  that  have  all  the  look  of  originality  about 
them.  These  are  acts  of  wnll.  Whatever  you  do 
of  your  own  will,  without  any  external  compulsion, 
is  a  cause  simply,  so  far  as  you  know  it.  What  is 
the  cause  of  this  book  rising  from  the  table?  The 
hand  that  holds  it.  What  raises  the  hand?  The 
arm.  What  raises  the  arm  ?  The  muscles.  What 
contracts  the. muscles?  The  nerves.  What  stimu- 
lates the  nerves?  The  brain.  What  sets  the  brain 
in  motion?  The  will.  That  is  the  end  of  the  se- 
ries. You  can  go  no  further.  The  only  first  cause 
of  which  we  have  any  knowledge  is  will.  And 
lience  we  are  constrained  by  the  law  of  our  intel- 
lectual constitution,  if  w^e  take  it  for  our  guide  (and 
we  have  no  other),  to  conceive  of  the  great  first 
Cause,  as  Will  in  action.  "  He  spake,  and  it  was 
done;  He  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast." 

Again,  we  are  constrained  by  a  law  of  our  intel- 
lectual constitution,  not  only  to  demand  a  cause  for 
everything  that  begins  to  exist,  but  to  demand  an 
adequate  cause.  Out  of  nothing,  nothing  comes. 
And  if  only  a  part  of  an  effect  can  be  attributed  to 
any  particular  cause,  we  cannot  rest  till  the  remain- 
der of  the  effect  is  accounted  for  also.     Hence  it 


ii 


ill 


4 


i! 


40 


7:he  foundations. 


follows  that,  inasmuch  as  there  is  life  in  the  uni- 
verse, the  great  first  Cause  must  be  a  living  cause. 
And  this  is  altogether  irrespective  of  the  question 
as  to  whether  it  is  possible  to  get  life  produced  by 
a  process  of  nature  out  of  dead  matter.  I  do  not 
believe  it  will  ever  be  done.  But  even  supposing  it 
was  found  that  among  the  wonderful  evolutions  of 
nature  must  be  included  the  development  of  dead 
matter  into  living  organisms,  we  should  simply 
have  to  alter  our  conceptions  of  the  so-called  dead 
matter.  It  might  still  have  the  appearance  of  dead 
matter;  but  if  it  were  possible  for  life  to  be  got  out 
of  it,  there  must  be  life  in  it  t^omehow,  however 
deep  down  in  its  being  and  far  bid  from  our  eyes  it 
might  be.  Out  of  notliing,  nothing  comes.  And 
if  anything  be  absolutely  and  totally  dead,  you 
cannot  get  life  out  of  it.  You  can  conceive  of  a 
living  agent  putting  life  into  dead  matter,  but  it  is 
clearly  impossible  to  get  life  out  of  it  in  any  shape, 
if  there  were  not  life  in  it  previously  in  some  shape. 
Hence,  in  any  event,  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  es- 
cape the  conclusion  that  the  first  cause  of  the  uni- 
verse must  have  been  a  living  cause.  And  accord- 
ingly even  the  strictest  materialists,  when  they 
think  at  all  clearly  on  the  subject,  attribute  to  the 
original  atoms  at  least  the  "  promise  and  potency" 
of  life.  So  you  see  the  choice  is  not  between  a  liv- 
ing cause  and  a  dead  cause,  but  between  one  living 


THE   WITNESS   WITHIN. 


41 


cause  and  countless  millions  of  living  causes.  And 
whether  it  is  more  rational  to  assume  one  really  liv- 
ing God  or  countless  millions  of  potentially  living 
atoms,  as  the  great  first  cause  of  the  system  of 
things  in  which  we  live,  I  think  I  may  leave  a  can- 
did mind  to  judge. 

Furthermore,  this  same  law  of  our  intellectual 
constitution  constrains  us  to  seek  an  intelligent 
cause.  Here  we  might  argue  back  from  the  fact 
of  intelligent  existence,  just  as  we  have  been  doing 
from  the  fact  of  life.  In  the  same  w^ay,  as  the  atoms 
must  have  been  potentially  living  before  it  was  pos- 
sible that  life  could  have  been  evolved  out  of  them, 
so  they  must  have  been  potentially  intelligent  be- 
fore intelligence  could  have  been  evolved  out  of 
them.  There  must  always  be  involution  before  there 
can  be  evolution ;  and  the  question  still  remains,  if 
the  atoms  are  possessed  of  even  potential  life  and 
intelligence,  where  did  that  potential  life  and  intel- 
ligence come  from?  And  here  a<i:ain  the  alterna- 
tive  is  between  one  living,  intelligent  God,  and 
millions  upon  millions  of  potentially  living  and 
intelligent  atoms  as  the  great  first  cause  of  the  uni- 
verse. 

But  besides  the  fact  of  intelligent  life,  there  are, 
also,  the  marks  of  intelligence  all  over  creation. 
Here  we  come  to  the  great  "  argument  from  design," 
as  it  has  been  called.     But  this  covers  so  vast  afield 


f-iS 


i] 


■'4 


42 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


that  we  must  reserve  it  for  separate  consideration. 
There  the  evidences  for  the  being  of  God  are  so 
multitudinous  that  no  one  wlio  has  even  a  small 
fraction  of  them  clearly  in  view,  without  being 
mystified  by  the  sophisms  of  those  who  have  tried 
to  obscure  their  meaning  and  destroy  their  force, 
can  fail  to  be  thoroughly  convinced.  This  we  hope 
to  see  clearly  in  next  lecture.     . 

Meanwhile  let  us  see  where  we  are.  "We  have 
had  the  testimony  of  the  heart,  the  testimony  of  the 
soul,  the  testimony  of  the  conscience,  the  testimony 
of  the  intellect — all  pointing  in  the  one  direction. 
Each  of  these  witnesses  alone  has  been  found  suf- 
ficient by  some  of  the  greatest  and  best  men  that 
ever  lived.  And  what  shall  we  say  of  the  strength 
of  the  evidence  when  all  the  four  are  found  to  con- 
verge to  the  same  result !  Eem ember  what  we 
found  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  evidence — that  the 
second  independent  witness  far  more  than  doubles, 
and  the  third  immeasurably  more  than  trebles,  the 
strength  of  the  evidence.  And  here  we  have  four, 
not  one  of  which  can  be  impeached  in  truthfulness 
without  making  our  nature  a  lie  and  the  certain 
knowledge  of  anything  an  impossibility.  May  we 
not,  tlien,  assuredly  believe  that  God  is,  and  shall 
we  not  worship  and  honor  and  love  Him  with  all 


our  heart  and  soul  and  strength  and  mind? 


LECTUEE  III. 


THE  WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


"We  have  had  the  evidence  for  the  existence  of 
God  from  our  spiritual  constitution,  and  we  have 
found  there  at  least  four  independent  witnesses: 
tl  ^  heart,  the  soul,  the  conscience,  and  the  intel- 
lect. We  now  look  out  into  the  wide  Universe  to 
see  what  we  can  find  there.  And  as  soon  as  we 
open  our  eyes  upon  the  great  world  without  us,  wo 
recognize  what  seem  to  be  unmistakable  signs  of  a 
designing  and  controlling  mind  everywhere.  "We 
do  not  need  to  go  further  than  our  own  bodies  for 
evidence  which  is  quite  irresistible  to  the  unsophis- 
ticated. Study  tlie  eye,  the  ear,  the  hand,  any  part 
of  that  curious  and  most  complicated  mechanism 
which  brings  us  into  relation  to  the  outer  world, 
and  the  evidence  is  already  complete.  Then  you 
may  consider  the  body  as  a  whole,  with  the  wonder- 
ful mutual  adaptations  of  its  various  parts.  You 
may  then  think  of  the  relation  of  these  bodies  of 
ours  to  their  environment :  to  the  air  which  we 

(43) 


u 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


breathe,  the  light  by  which  we  see,  the  food  we  eat, 
the  water  we  drink,  the  earth  on  which  we  tread, 
and  so  on  through  innumerable  relations,  every  one 
of  which  in  its  accuracy  of  adaptation  is  a  separate 
evidence  of  the  consummate  wisdom  of  Him  whose 
thought  it  expresses.  And  if  in  our  own  bodies 
we  see  such  overwhelming  evidences  of  design, 
what  shall  we  say  of  the  tens  of  thousands  of  species 
of  living  creatures  with  which  the  earth  is  peopled, 
every  one  of  which  is  a  study  in  itself?  "What 
shall  we  say  of  the  innumerable  varieties  of  plants, 
every  one  of  them  a  closely-packed  volume  of 
thought  ?  What  shall  we  say  of  the  wonders  which 
science  has  revealed  to  us  of  the  action  and  inter- 
action of  the  great  forces  of  nature,  such  as  gravi- 
tation, heat  and  electricity — of  the  endless  varia- 
tions and  combinations  of  matter,  from  the  invisi- 
ble atom  and  molecule  to  the  vast  mass  of  the 
planets  and  suns  which  the  spectroscope  has  proved 
to  be  made  up  of  the  same  elements  with  which  we 
on  earth  are  so  familiar  ;  and  of  the  great  laws  of 
order  by  which  these  tremendous  forces,  and  these 
huge  masses,  and  those  most  delicate  and  fragile  or- 
ganisms are  all  so  regulated,  and  controlled,  and 
related  to  each  other,  that  the  vast  system  is  no 
chaos  but  a  true  cosmos?  What  more  can  we  say 
with  our  larger  view  than  was  said  of  old  :    "  O 


THE   WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


45 


Lord,  how  manifold  are  Thy  works  !  In  wisdom 
hast  Thou  made  them  all;  the  earth  is  full  of  Thy 
riches?" 

To  those  who  are  not  acquainted  with  the  direc- 
tion of  recent  discussions  on  the  subject,  it  will  no 
doubt  seem  very  strange  that  any  sane  mind  should 
question  the  force  of  such  evidences  as  these.  But, 
such  is  the  ingenuity  of  modern  skepticism  that, 
though  new  investigations  are  continually  adding 
to  the  vast  multitude  of  the  evidences,  yet  there 
never  was  a  time  when  the  conclusions  i;o  which 
they  point  have  been  more  obstinately  doubted. 
Clouds  of  sophistry  have  been  raised,  and  the  vision 
of  many  has  been  sadly  obscured.  And  the  task 
for  him  who  would  present  the  evidence,  is  not  to 
multiply  illustrations — this  is  done  as  eflfectively 
as  could  be  desired  by  some  of  those  who  reject  the 
conclusion,  as  for  example,  in  some  of  the  fascina- 
ting studies  of  Charles  Darwin — but  to  clear  away 
those  clouds  of  sophistry  in  which  the  entire  subject 
has  been  enveloped.  This  is  what  we  shall  now  at- 
tempt to  do. 

Remember,  first,  that  you  can  not  get  rid  of  in- 
tention in  the  doing  of  a  thing  by  showing  how  it 
is  done.  Even  after  we  have  Earned  all  about  the 
way  in  which  a  watch  is  constructed,  it  is  quite  as 
evident  as  before,  that  it  was  constructed  for  a  pur- 


!    II 


au-CK-rrm-ij^ 


46 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


pose,  and  that  it  would  never  have  been,  unless 
there  previously  had  been  a  mind  to  design  it. 
And  even  supposing  some  wonderfully  complex 
machine  were  invented  which  dispensed  with  all 
need  of  watch-making  skill;  that  all  that  was 
necessary  was  to  feed  it  with  pieces  of  gold  and 
steel,  etc.,  and  watches  would  come  out  at  the  other 
end;  would  that  prove  that  the  watch  was  not  the 
product  of  intelligence?  By  a  certain  sophistry  it 
could  be  made  to  appear  so.  '•  You  see  that  boy 
who  is  putting  the  metal  into  the  receiver?  Well, 
he  has  scarcely  an  idea  in  his  head.  He  has  no 
more  idea  of  the  mechanism  of  a  watch  than  a  dog 
has.  Yet  you  say  the  watches  he  is  making  are  the 
product  of  intelligence ! "  The  fallacy  is  very  trans- 
parent. It  seems  to  need  little  intelligence  if  you 
take  for  granted  the  system  of  things  ready  to  the 
boy's  hand.  But  when  you  ask  how  came  that 
system  there,  you  find  that  in  order  to  explain  it, 
you  require  to  assume  not  only  the  intelligence 
which  is  expressed  in  the  watch  itself,  but  that 
which  is  expressed  in  the  complicated  machine  by 
which  all  the  parts  are  put  together  without  the 
need  of  any  further  skill  in  the  process.  Suppose 
now,  finally,  that  a  machine  were  constructed  that 
did  not  even  need  feeding,  that  could  select  and 
attract  its  own  materials  and  carry  on  the  whole 


THE  WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


4T 


process  without  either  an  engineer  or  even  a  boy  to 
attend  to  it.  Would  you  say  that  the  watches 
made  by  such  a  machine  were  produced  without 
intelligence?  Is  it  not  evident  that  the  more  you 
dispense  with  the  skill  of  an  artificer  in  the  pro- 
cess, the  more  need  is  there  for  a  high  degree  of 
intelligence  in  the  original  invention?  I  have 
chosen  the  good  old  watch  illustration,  just  because 
it  has  been  so  much  objected  to.  It  has  been 
objected  to  as  leading  to  a  pitiable  *'  carpenter 
theory"  of  the  world,  as  Herbert  Spencer  calls  it, 
as  if  the  Deity  were  some  great  man  standing  out- 
side of  his  work,  and  making  it  as  a  carpenter 
makes  a  chair  or  a  watchmaker  a  watch.  And  the 
objectors  suppose  that  as  soon  as  they  have  shown 
that  the  work  is  not  done  from  without,  but  as  it 
wore  from  within, — that  as  soon  as  they  have  shown 
an  array  of  blind  forces  busily  at  work  producing 
the  result  without  intelligence,  they  have  got  rid 
of  the  argument  altogether;  whereas  the  simple 
truth  is,  they  have  only  added  so  much  to  its  force. 
It  is  not  so  immediately  apparent,  b^^«use  the 
forces  which  you  see  actually  working  are  unintel- 
ligent; but  very  little  reflection  is  needed  to  make 
it  evident  that  back  of  these  unintelligent  forces 
there  must  have  been  a  designing  mind  that  set  the 
whole  train  in  operation.  ;    ' 


%i  ■■■ 


1  [. 


n. 


-5 1 


48 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


"  Suppose,  now,  we  drop  the  illustration  of  a  watch 
and  take,  instead,  an  apple.  An  apple  certainly 
looks  as  if  it  were  something  more  than  a  chance 
combination  of  particles  of  matter.  It  looks  as  it 
the  diiferent  parts  of  it  were  adapted  to  each  other, 
and  as  if  the  whole  of  it  were  intended  for  some 
use  or  uses).  Now  how  does  it  affect  the  question 
to  sh6w  tliat  the  apple  is  the  product  of  certain  un- 
intelligent forces  in  the  tree  itself?  It  only  shows 
that  the  tree  needs  to  be  accounted  for  as  well  as 
the  apple.  And  how  does  it  affect  the  question  to 
know  that  this  wonderful  apple-making  machine 
(for  it  is  this,  though  it  is  much  more  than  this) 
feeds  itself  and  runs  itself  ?  The  only  difference  it 
makes  is  that  the  self-feeding  and  self-running  have 
to  be  added  to  the  evidences  of  intelligence  in  the 
whole  phenomenon. 

IS^ow  apply  this  to  Prof.  TyndalPs  famous  at- 
tempt to  construct  (in  tli^ory)  the  eye  by  means  of 
the  action  of  light,  causing  first  a  slight  bulging  of 
the  epidermis,  and  then  "  through  the  operation  of 
infinite  adjustments"  at  length  reaching  the  "  per- 
fection it  displays  in  the  hawk  and  the  eagle." 
Most  unsophisticated  people  would  think  it  a  most 
absurd  attempt  to  explain  the  formation  of  the  eye. 
But  even  supposing  it  were  quite  correct,  would  it 
take  away  the  evidence  of  an  intelligent  mind  in 


THE    WITNESS    WITHOUT. 


49 


desi<ijning  and  producing  the  eye  ?  What  about 
the  life,  and  light,  and  the  many  complex  conditions 
wliich  he  classes  together  as  environment,  all  which 
he  needs  to  start  with  ?  Give  me  the  right  kind  of 
material  and  the  right  kind  of  environment,  and  I 
will  make  watches  without  any  effort  of  mind  quite 
as  well  as  Prof.  Tyndall  can  make  eyes.  And  then 
after  he  gets  the  right  kind  of  material  and  the 
right  kind  of  force  and  the  right  kind  of  environ- 
ment, he  still  needs  further,  "infiniteadjustmen.s." 
I  use  liis  own  phrase  "infinite  adjustments." 
Where  does  he  get  any  adjustments  if,  as  he  holds, 
nothing  is  adjusted  ?  Ah  !  these  words  "environ- 
ment" and  "adjustment"  are  very  convenient. 
They  seem  to  be  so  simple.  They  seem  to  make  a 
thing  so  plain.  Whereas  they  really  leave  tlie 
problem  as  complex  as  ever,  and  as  much  as  ever 
in  need  of  intelligence  to  account  for  it.  And  yet 
how  many  unreasoning  people  are  there  who  think 
that  Prof.  Tyndall  has  accounted  for  the  wonderful 
mechanism  of  the  eye  without  any  intelligent  cause 
by  saying  that  it  is  due  to  infinite  adjustments,  by 
an  adjusted  light,  upon  an  adjusted  epidermis,  in  an 
adjusted  environment !  Is  it  not  manifest  that  there 
is  nothing  in  all  these  phrases  but  a  fog  of  sophistry, 
and  that  the  evidence  which  the  eye  furnishes  of  intel- 
lis-ence  in  the  Creator  is  left  as  stroniT  as  ever? 


11 


hi' 


i 


't 


v'- 


50 


THE   FO UxXD ATIONS. 


Itcineuibcr,  in  the  second  ])laco,  that  jou  can  not 
explain  complexity  by  putting  it  so  far  away  that 
you  can  no  longer  discern  it.  A  considerable  de- 
gree of  skill  is  required  to  construct  a  great  balloon. 
And  as  you  look  at  it  upon  the  ground,  it  is  quite  a 
complex  mechanism.  But  after  it  has  sailed  away  up 
until  it  is  nearly  out  of  sight  you  lose  sight  of  all  the 
complexity  of  its  construction,  and,  for  all  you  can 
see,  it  would  require  no  skill  to  make  it.  But 
no  one  in  his  senses  would  say  that  as  soon  as  it  got 
nearly  or  quite  out  of  sight  all  evidence  of  intelli- 
gence in  its  construction  was  gone.  We  shall  see 
presently  how  the  illustration  applies.  Here  is  the 
evolution  theory  as  given  by  Tyndall:  "Not  only 
the  more  ignoble  forms  of  animalcular  or  animal  life, 
not  alone  the  noble  forms  of  the  horse  and  the  lion, 
not  alone  the  exquisite  and  wonderful  mechanism 
of  the  human  bodv,  but  the  human  mind  itself — 
emotion,  intellect,  will,  and  all  their  phenomena — 
were  once  latent  in  a  fiery  cloud."  Now  apart 
altogether  from  the  probability  or  improbability  of 
that  theory,  consider  a  moment  whether  it  really 
accounts  for  the  complexity  of  the  universe.  It 
seems  to  do  it.  A  cloud  is  to  our  notion  a  very 
simple  thing.  But  what  of  this  evolution  cloud? 
I  do  not  refer  merely  to  its  being  fiery.  That  is  a 
very  slight  addition  to  its  complexity.     But  think 


A 


I 'I 


\ 


THE   WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


61 


of  the  infinity  of  things  that  are  in  it.     They  are 


ther 


But  what  does  latent 


"latent 

mean  ?  Lying  hid.  They  are  all  there,  only  wo 
can  not  see  them.  Does  the  fact  that  wo  can  not 
see  them  get  rid  of  them?  By  no  means.  The 
latent  complexity  of  the  far-away  balloon  is  as  real 
as  the  patent  complexity  of  the  near  one.  And  the 
latent  complexity  of  the  evolutionist's  fiery  cloud  is 
as  real  as  the  patent  complexity  of  the  vast  and 
varied  universe  which  they  say  has  been  evolved  out 
of  it.  And  if  we  wanted  crov/ning  evidence  of  in- 
finite intelligence,  we  should  ask  nothing  more 
overwhelming  than  the  fact  of  the  existence  of  such 
a  fiery  cloud,  with  such  wonderful  complexity  and 
potency  lying  hid  in  it. 

Herbert  Spencer  says  (in  his  "  First  Principles"), 
and  the  long  words  give  an  air  of  very  great  wis- 
dom to  the  saying:  "  The  transformation  of  an  in- 
definite, incoherent,  homogeneity  into  a  definite,  co- 
herent heterogeneity,  which  goes  on  everywhere  * 
*  is  consequent  upon  certain  simple  laws  offeree;" 
which  being  translated  means  this:  The  simple  is 
constantly  being  changed  into  the  complex  by  mere 
force  (without  intelligence).  ]^ow  let  me  ask  your 
attention  while  I  expose  the  fallacy  here.  The  idea 
is  that  by  tracing  back,  for  example,  all  the  forms 
of  animal  organism  to  simple  protoplasm,  as  evolu- 


W 


if 


! 

T 


;• 


4. 


J, 

I 


52 


IHE   FOUNDATIONS. 


tion  seeks  to  do,  and  many  think  it  has  done,  you 
have  no  longer  to  account  for  the  complexity  of 
eyes  and  ears  and  hands  and  feet  and  so  on,  but 
only  for  the  simple  structureless  protoplasm  out  of 
which  all  have  been  evolved.    But  what  do  "simple" 
and  "structureless"  mean  as  applied  to  protoplasm? 
Do  they  mean  reall}'  simple  arid  really  structureless? 
!N"o thing    of  the  kind.     They  mean   simple  and 
structureless  so  far  as  our  eyes  aided  by  our  micro- 
scopes   can    see.     No    further.     And    the    more 
thoughtful  of  our  evolutionists  are  beginning  to  ac- 
knowledge this.     As  evidence  let  me  quote  from 
the  inaugural  address  of  President  Allman  at  the 
last  meeting  of  the  British  Association:  "Of  two 
particles  of  protoplasm  between  which  we  may  de- 
fy nil  the  power  of  the  microscope,  and  all  the  re- 
sources of  the  laboratory  to  detect  a  difference,  one 
can  develop  only  to  a  jelly-fish,  the  other  only  to  a 
man,  and  one  conclusion  alone  is  here  possible^ — 
that  deep  within  them  there  must  be  a  fundamental 
difference,  which  thus  determines  .their  inevitable 
destiny,  but  of  which  we  know  nothing,  and  can 
assert  nothing  beyond  the  statement  that  it  must 
depend  on    their  hidden  molecular  constitution. 
In  the  molecular  condition   of  protoplasm  there 
is  probably  as  much  complexity  as  in  the  disposi- 
tion of  organs  in  the  most  highly  differentiated 


1^ 


THE   WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


53 


organisms;  and  between  two  masses  of  protoplasm 
indistinguishable  from  one  another,  there  may  be 
as  much  molecular  difference  as  t^iere  is  between 
the  form  and  arrangement  of  organs  in  the  most 
widely  separated  animals  and  plants."  You  see, 
then,  evolution  is  not  from  thf;  really  simple, 
but  only  from  the  apparently  simple,  to  the  com- 
plex. Is  the  complexity  any  less  because  it  is 
"deep  within?"  Does  it  explain  or  even  simplify  it 
at  all  to  shift  it  from  organic  conditions  in  which 
we  see  it,  to  molecular  conditions  in  which  we  can- 
not see  it?  Kot  at  all.  The  wonder  remains  as 
great  as  ever,  if  anything,  greater;  and  the  necessity 
as  urgent  as  ever  for  an  intelligent  -oower  to  account 
for  the  latent  complexity  of  things  which  seem  so 
simple  and  are  "  so  wondrous  wise." 

Eemember,  next,  that  you  cannot  dispense  with 
intelligence  by  laying  stress  upon  laws.  Every  one 
sees,  of  course,  that  original  creation  is  not  touched 
by  the  supposition  of  laws.  Ihere  must  be  some- 
thing to  regulate  before  there  can  be  a  law.  But 
many  seem  to  think  that  with  che  exception  of  the 
bare  act  of  creation,  the  laws  of  nature  shut  God 
out  of  the  universe,  and  account  for  all  its  changes 
without  Kim.  But  what  is  a  law  of  nature?  It  is 
simply  a  certain  order  in  which  things  are  invar- 
iably done.     But  we  have  already  shown  that  to 


;n 


if 


54: 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


explain  the  order  in  which  a  thing  is  done  does  not 
show  that  it  can  be  done  without  intelligence,  far 
less  that  no  one  does  it.  What  do  these  people, 
that  make  so  mnch  of  the  potency  of  laws,  imag- 
ine that  laws  are?  Are  they  persons  or  things,  or 
what?  Are  they  anything  else  than  a  statement 
of  the  order  in  which  things  are  done?  Take, 
for  example,  the  law  that  is  made  so  much  of 
now-a-days:  the  law  of  the  cornilation  and  conser- 
vation of  force.  "What  is  it?  I  underscand  it  to 
be  a  statement  of  certain  invariable  relations  that 
have  been  discovered  among  the  forces  of  nature. 
But  a  statement  of  certain  relations  does  not  surely 
account  for  them.  It  has  been  well  said  by  Prof. 
Christlieb:  "The  old  heathen  personified  the  forces 
of  nature  and  made  them  demi-gods;  we  do  the 
same  and  call  them  laws.  The  heathen,  however, 
were  rational  enough  to  place  these  individual  les- 
ser gods  in  subjection  to  the  Most  High;  while  we 
invest  our  laws  of  nature  with  sovereign  power,  in 
whose  august  presence  the  very  hands  of  God  Him- 
self are  tied  and  bound!"  The  truth  is  that  the 
laws  of  nature  are  among  the  very  wonders  of  the 
universe  which  need  to  be  accounted  for,  and  which 
cannot  be  accounted  for  without  a  designing  and 
controlling  mind. 
The  want  of  time  forbids  me   to  taka  up  some 


THE   WITNESS   WITHOUT. 


55 


/ 


minor  sophistries,  such  as  the  quibble  of  John 
Stuart  Mill,  that  the  adaptation  of  means  to  an  end 
implies  weakness — an  objection  which  he  presents 
as  if  it  were  new,  and  which  lias  been  hailed  by 
many  as  if  it  were  new,  though  you  will  find  it 
taken  up  and  answered  in  so  old  and  well-known  a 
book  as  Faley  (Natural  Theology,  Chap.  Ill) — or 
the  many  appeals  to  our  ignorance  by  pointing 
out  things  of  which  we  cannot  now  see  the  use,  in 
answer  to  which  it  is  enough  to  say  that  there  are 
so  many,  many  things  in  which  we  can  see  con- 
summate wisdom,  that  it  is  not  unreasonable  to 
take  some  things  on  trust  which  we  can  not 
see,  and  join  with  the  psalmist,  even  though  we 
have  to  go  beyond  the  region  of  knowledge 
and  into  that  of  faith  in  making  the  ascription 
universal,  "  O,  Lord,  how  manifold  are  Thy  works; 
in  wisdom  hast  Thou  made  them  all;  the  earth  is 
full  of  Thy  riches." 

And  Eow,  having  reached  the  limit  of  time,  I 
am  reluctantly  compelled .  to  come  to  a  conclusion 
by  pointing  out  that,  though  we  have  been  able 
only  in  the  slightest  way  to  open  up  the  subject, 
we  yet  have  evidence  for  the  existence  of  God  be- 
yond what  we  have  for  the  existence  of  our  fellow- 
men.  What  evidence  have  I  that  you  exist;  you 
as  an  intelligent  being,  I  mean?    I  can  not  see  your 


i'l 
■< 


^il 


^^\\ 


'm 


'■' 


m 


w 


■  ■■r 
1  t 


56 


THE   FOUNDATION. 


intelligence.  I  can  not  see  you^  strictly  speaking, 
at  all.  I  see  certain  motions  of  your  body  which 
look  like  intelligence  (though  I  may  not  think  that 
all  of  them  do — some  of  your  actions  may  be  such 
that  I  can  not  see  m.uch  sense  in  them),  and  I  am 
conscious  of  some  sensations  which  seem  to  be  in 
my  ear,  and  which  appear  to  me  to  be  the  result  of 
certain  vibrations  of  the  air,  of  which  the  motion 
of  your  lips  and  the  force  of  your  lungs  seem  to  me 
to  be  the  cause,  and  from  these  material  phenomena 
I  infer  the  existence  of  a  spirit  in  relation  to  mine. 
Well,  we  have  precisely  the  same  kind  of  evidence 
for  the  existence  of  God;  and  in  addition,  we  have, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  witness  within  us,  the  testi- 
mony of  the  heart,  of  the  soul,  of  the  conscience, 
and  of  the  intellect.  . 

Hiyw  is  it,  then,  if  the  evidence  is  so  complete, 
that  there  can  be  any  atheism  ?  A  very  lengthened 
answer  might  be  given  to  this  question,  but  I  can 
only  make  two  suggestions, — the  one  looking  to  in- 
tellectual, the  other  to  ir.oral,  considerations.  The 
phenomena  by  which  I  judge  of  your  existence  are 
all  within  so  limited  an  area  that  they  can  be  easily 
grasped  in  their  unity,  and  the/  are  so  familiar  that 
I  can  easily  explain  them  as  in  harmony  with  each 
other;  whereas,  the  phenomena  by  which  I  judge 
of  the  existence  of  God  are  so  vast  and  varied  and 


THE   WITIS^ESS   WITHOUT. 


67 


T^idely  scattered,  and  many  of  them  so  difficult  to 
interpret,  that  the  mind  becomes  confused  by  the 
magnitude  of  the  subject.  But,  though  the  reason- 
ing is  more  difficult  to  follow,  it  is  precisely  the 
same  reasoning,  and  just  as  vab'd,  as  the  other;  and 
though  the  conclusion  is  often  missed,  it  is  reached 
(when  it  is  reached),  exactly  in  the  same  way,  and  on 
the  same  grounds  as  the  other.  But  besides  the  in- 
tellectual difficulties  there  are  moral  difficulties. 
The  disturbing  element  of  sin  is  one  which  must 
not  be  lost  sight  of.  Men  are  in  danger  of  saying 
ill  their  hearts,  ''  There  is  no  God."  And  the  ali- 
too-natural  aversion  of  the  human  heart  to  God 
gives  only  a  too  sufficient  explanation  of  the  preva- 
lence of  unbelief  in  the  Divine  presence  and  agency 
in  the  universe. 

We  do  not  deny  that  there  are  difficulties  in  the 
subject  and  obstacles  in  the  human  heart;  and  that 
is  the  reason  why  we  hold  that,  though  the  evidences 
for  the  being  and  agency,  and  even  for  the  goodness 
of  God,  are  amply  sufficient  to  satisfy  a  candid  in- 
quirer, yet  there  is  room  and  there  is  need  for  a 
revelation,  to  explain,  so  far  as  may  be,  the  difficul- 
ties, and  remove  the  obstructions  to  the  knowledge 
and  worship  and  love  of  the  only  living  and  true 
God.  This  we  hope  to  see  quite  clearly  in  our 
next  lecture. 


I' 


■ 


\4 


'I 


I  I 


■■■■■■ 


If  I 


SECOND  FAET. 


THE  CHIEF  CORNER  STONE, 
®oti  in  Cljrist. 


'( 


a 


'■If* 

i 


Ml 


''•i ' 


i;i  a 


Wi 


LECTUEE  IV. 

REVELATION  OF  GOD  IN  A  HUMAN  LIFE. 

From  the  bed-rock  of  Theism  we  pass  now  to 
the  temple  of  Christianity  which  is  reared  upon  it. 
From  the  great  fact  of  the  universe,  that  "  God  is," 
we  pass  to  the  great  fact  of  history,  that  "  God 
was  in  Christ."  Oar  former  inquiry  was  as  to 
the  foundation  of  all  religion.  Our  present  in- 
quiry is  as  to  the  foundation  of  Christianity  dis- 
tinctively. Let  us  then  proceed  to  this  second  in- 
quiry as  carefully  and  as  candidly  as  we  can. 

At  the  outset  we  have  to  encounter  an  unreason- 
ing and  unreasonable  prejudice  in  the  common 
notion  among  skeptics,  that  it  is  an  extremely  im- 
probable thing  that  God  would  make  Himself 
kiiown  in  a  human  life.  If  any  man  in  the  present 
day  should  set  up  the  claim  to  be  himself  a  revel- 
ation of  God,  all  sensible  people  would  consider 
him  lit  for  a  lunatic  asylum.  And  why,  they  say, 
should  we  treat  such  a  claim  any  differently  from 
the  mere  fact  of  its  being  made  long  ago?    "Which 

(61) 


62 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


would  be  sensible  enough  if  there  was  nothing  but 
the  mere  fact  of  its  being  made  long  ago.  But 
what  if  there  be  so  many  facts  and  considerations 
in  the  case  of  the  claim  advanced  by  Jesus  of  Naz- 
areth, that  no  man  who  allows  these  facts  and  con- 
siderations their  proper  weight,  can  fail  to  recog- 
nize that  His  claim  is  unique  and  irresistible !  Some 
of  these  many  facts  and  considerations  we  shall 
present  further  on.  Meantime  what  we  propose  to 
do  is,  to  show  that  there  is  no  Improbability  in 
God's  revealing  Himself  in  a  human  life,  but  that 
it  is  just  what,  from  an  intelligent  view  of  man  and 
his  environment,  we  should  naturally  and  reason- 
ably expect. 

We  have  seen  that  the  revelation  which  God  has 
given  of  Himself  in  nature  and  in  the  soul  of  man 
is  sufficient  to  prove  His  existence  and  agency, 
"His  eternal  power  and  godhead;"  but  it  is  not 
sufficient  to  satisfy  the  craving  of  his  nature,  and 
meet  the  wants  which  spring  out  of  his  circum- 
stances. Even  the  intellect  requires  something 
more  definite  in  order  to  a  clear  and  abiding  con- 
viction  of  God's  personality.  "We  have  seen  at  the 
close  of  the  last  lecture  that,  though  the  personality 
of  God  is  revealed  to  us  in  the  same  way  as  the 
personality  of  our  fellow-men,  yet  the  tokens  of  it 
are  distributed  over  so  wide  an  area,  and  many  of 


I 


REVELATION   OF   GOD   IN   A   HUMAN   LIFE.   63 


them  so  difficult  to  interpret,  tliat  tlie  mind  is  apt 
to  be  bewildered  and  lost.  We  have  a  touching 
illustration  of  this  in  the  cry  of  Job:  "Behold  I  go 
forward,  but  lie  is  not  there;  and  backward,  but  I 
cannot  perceive  Him ;  on  the  left  hand,  where  He 
doth  work,  but  I  cannot  behold  Him;  He  hideth 
Himself  on  the  right  hand,  that  I  cannot  see  Him." 
And  it  is  a  well-known  fact,  that  those  who  reject 
the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ  are  very  apt  to  lose 
their  conviction  of  His  personality.  Hence  the  dei- 
fication of  natural  laws;  hence  Pantheism;  hence, 
too,  Agnosticism.  Hence  also  such  speculations  as 
that  of  Matthew  Arnold  about  "  the  power,  not  our- 
selves, that  makes  for  righteousness."  The  intel- 
lect then  craves  and  needs  a  definite  revelation  of 
personality. 

The  conscience,  too,  craves  additional  light.  We 
cannot  think  of  the  God  of  the  universe  as  anything 
but  a  just  God.  Yet  how  many  things  are  there 
which  it  seems  impossible  to  reconcile  with  justice. 
And  then  there  is  sin.  What  are  w^e  to  do  about 
it?  Here,  then,  you  see  there  are  two  great  ques- 
tions awaiting  solution.  How  can  God  be  shown 
to  be  just  with  man?  And  how  shall  man  be  just 
Avith  God?  To  these  questions  nature  gives  no  an- 
swer; and  the  conscience  cries  out  for  a  revelation. 

Then  there  is  the  cry  of  the  heart.    There  are 


m 


r'' 


■  I 


.;f 


64 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


many  things  in  nature  that  tell  of  divine  good- 
ness;  but  then  there  are  so  many  things  which 
seem  to  contradict  them.  And  even  though  good- 
ness were  proved,  the  heart  wants  more,  it  craves 
for  love.  And  can  it  be,  that  the  God  who  has  im- 
planted this  great,  this  seemingly  divine  love  in 
my  heart  is  a  stranger  to  it  Himself?  Nature 
seems  a  revelation  of  law;  and  the  heart  inquires, 
may  there  not  be  also  a  revelation  of  love? 

Finally  there  is  the  cry  of  the  soul. 

*'  Here  sits  he  shaping'  wings  to  fly; 
His  heart  forbodes  a  mystery; 
He  names  the  name,  Eternity: 
That  type  of  Perfect  in  his  mind 
In  Nature  can  he  nowhere  find.'* 

And  shall  it  not  be  found  at  all?  And  shall  the 
veil  which  hides  the  eternal  world  remain  forever 
drawn  ?  Must  it  be  that  we  shall  have  no  hint  of 
what  the  future  life  shall  be,  or  even  any  assurance 
whether  it  shall  be  at  all? 

Such  considerations  as  these  are  often  brought 
forward  as  arguments  against  the  existence  of  God. 
But  it  is  manifest  that  in  such  a  connection  they  are 
out  of  place.  They  are  all  appeals  to  our  igno- 
rance; and  as  we  have  seen,  we  have  no  right  to  let 
what  we  do  not  know  disturb  what  we  do  know. 
But  as  we  are  using  them  now,  they  are  not  an  ap- 


4 


mms^^*m'4.*si^%.*j.  sr^--.- 1^^  ,*i5  ^i^;.^:-r__ti"^wzr,"r^  -TV*  1 


REVELATION   OF   GOD   IN   A   HUMAN    LIFE.   65 

peal  to  ignorance,  but  an  n\MpQQ\from  ignorance, 
calling  for  more  light.  While  they  by  no  means 
discredit  what  we  otherwise  know  about  God,  they 
do  show  very  clearly  that  the  light  of  nature  is  not 
sufficient,  and  that  therefore  we  may  reasonably  ex- 
pect some  further  revelation.  We  sorely  need  some 
revelation  which  will  be  not  only  as  valid,  but  as 
definite  and  intelligible  as  is  the  revelation  which 
we  make  of  ourselves  when  we  speak  to  one  another, 
or  as  near  it  in  definiteness  and  intelligibility  as 
the  nature  of  the  case  will  admit  of. 

And  now  the  questions  come:  Can  God  give 
such  a  revelation?  And  will  He  give  it?  That  He 
can  do  it  no  believer  in  the  existence  of  God  can 
deny.  "He  that  formed  the  eye,  shall  He  not  see?" 
He  that  has  given  us  the  faculty  of  speech,  can  He 
not  speak  to  us?  Of  course  He  can,  if  he  will.  But 
will  He?  Ko  one  can  tell  certainly;  because  He 
is  a  free  agent.  But  if  God  is  just  and  kind,  as  we 
cannot  help  believing  Him  to  be,  if  we  believe 
in  God  at  all  (for  belief  in  an  unjust  and  unkind 
God  would  be  manife'=^tly  worse  than  atheism  itself), 
if  He  is  just  and  kind,  we  have  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  He  will.  And  all  the  analogy  of  nature  is 
in  favor  of  it.  Wherever  there  is  a  mouth,  there  is 
something  to  fill  it;  wherever  there  is  a  want,  there 
is  some  provision  for  its  supply,  and  when  every  part 


1  s 


>6  i 


m 


v 


55:*   . 


6f. 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


I 


of  man's  spiritual  nature  cries  out  for  a  definite  reve- 
lation of  God,  surely  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  sup- 
pose that  it  niaj^  be  forthcoming. 

We  see  then  that  it  is  not  only  not  improbable, 
but  in  the  highest  degree  likely,  that  God  should 
add  some  revelation  to  that  which  nature  supplies. 
It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  it  is  probable  that 
such  a  revelation  should  be  given  in  a  human  life^ 
Buch  as  was  that  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

In  order  that  we  may  be  prepared  intelligently 
to  consider  this  question,  let  us  inquire  into  the 
necessary  conditions  of  God's  revealing  Himself  to 
man.  What  must  God  do  in  order  to  bring  His 
personality  distinctly  within  the  range  of  human 
knowledge?  Two  conditions  are  necessary.  First, 
self-limitation.  God  is  infinite,  we  are  finite.  The 
finite  can-  not  grasp  the  infinite;  and  accordingly 
the  revelation  must  be  through  the  medium  of 
some  finite  representation.  But  not  only  is  self- 
limitation  necessary :  there  must  also  be  condescen- 
sion to  the  limits  of  the  human  faculties.  There 
might  have  been  many  ways  of  revelation  through 
the  medium  of  the  finite,  which  would  have  been 
quite  out  of  the  reach  of  our  faculties.  The  revel- 
ation which  God  will  make  of  Himself,  therefore, 
must  be  in  terms  of  that  which  is  already  known. 
Not  only  was  it  necessary  that  the  revelation  should 


REVELATION   OF   GOD   IN  A   HUMA.N   LIFE.   67 

be  given  in  some  finite  form,  but  in  some  familiar 
form.  JN'ot  only  must  it  be  something  we  could  by 
possibility  grasp,  but  something  we  could  readily 
understand. 

You  see,  then,  that  the  revelation,  if  made  at  all, 
must  be  made  through  the  medium  of  some  of  the 
finite  things  with  which  we  are  familiar.  Now,  of 
all  thest>  things,  which  would  you  consider  the 
most  likely?  You  would  certainly  expect  that  use 
would  be  made  of  that  which  was  superior  rather 
than  of  that  which  was  inferior.  Manifestly  the 
higher  in  the  scale  of  being,  the  better  for  the  pur- 
pose. Well,  what  is  the  highest  thing  in  the  scale 
of  being  that  you  familiarly  know?  Is  it  not  a 
human  life,  a  pure  and  true  human  life?  From 
this  it  follows  that  a  human  life,  such  as  that  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  was,  is  the  best  conceivable 
medium  for  the  revelation  of  God. 
-  As  this  is  a  matter  of  very  great  importance,  let 
me  illustrate  it  a  little  further.  Let  us  for  the 
moment  put  ourselves  in  the  skeptical  attitude  of 
one  of  th«  disciples  of  Christ  when  he  said,  "Lord, 
show  us  the  Father,  and  it  sufiiceth  us."  The  diffi- 
culty of  Philip,  you  see,  is  just  the  difficulty  which 
many  have  at  the  present  time.  It  did  not  satisfy 
him  to  have  the  existence  of  a  Father  in  Heaven  as 
a  matter  of  faith;  he  wanted  it  as  a  matter  of 


t. 


;  i. 


lift 


1!), 


Iv 

II: 


I 


r 

I 


P 


i-:^ 


If 


G8 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


knowledge.  "  If  He  exists  let  Him  show  Himself," 
he  pleads.  Keasonably  enough,  we  say.  It  is  quite 
reasonable  that  our  Father  in  Heaven  should  take 
some  means  of  showing  Himself  to  us.  Well,  then 
suppose  some  manifestation  is  expected,  of  what 
nature  may  it  be?  To  be  quite  satisfactory,  it 
must  to  some  extent,  come  within  the  range  of  our 
senses,  and  best  of  all  if  it  come  within  the  range 
of  sight,  according  to  the  common  proverb,  "  see- 
ing is  believing."  Well,  what  kind  of  a  shape 
do  you  think  such  a  skeptic  as  Philip  might 
reasonably  expect  to  see?  Of  all  the  shapes  you 
can  think  of,  which  would  be  the  most  appropri- 
ate? To  this  there  can  be  only  one  answer.  If  any 
shape  at  all  was  to  bo  expected,  it  must,  beyond  all 
doubt,  have  been  that  of  a  man ;  because  it  is  the 
noblest  and  most  expressive  form  we  know  any- 
thing about.  Where  do  you  look  for  the  highest 
efforts  in  art — in  painting  for  example?  Is  it  in 
dealing  with  the  lovely  landscape,  or  with  the  toss- 
ing sea,  or  with  the  golden  clouds  of  sunset?  Or 
the  chosen  fields  of  Sir  Edwin  Landseer  and  Eosa 
Bonheur, — are  these  the  highest  fields  of  art?  Is 
there  not  one  department  which  stands  above  them 
all — the  delineation  of  "the  human  face  divine?" 
Higher  than  this  art  cannot  go.  Our  artists  paint 
angels,  it  is  true,  but  is  it  not  with  human  faces 


g"g«siyS*p'i"iBt^ 


\ 


KEVELATION   OF   GOD   IN   A   HUMAN   LIFE.   69 

tliat  they  paint  them?  As  for  the  wings  ,it  is  a 
question  whether  they  would  not  be  better  angels 
without  them.  The  art,  at  all  events,  in  painting 
a  good  angel  is  not  in  producing  the  wings,  but  in 
drawing  the  face  and  the  form.  It  is  in  that  which 
is  human  in  the  picture,  that  the  glory  and  the 
beauty  are  found.  If,  then,  any  form  was  to  be 
expected  at  all,  reason  would  undoubtedly  declare  it 
must  be  the  form  of  a  man.  But  again,  surely,  it 
would  not  be  a  dead  shape,  like  a  statue  or  a  pic- 
ture, or  a  lifeless  spectral  form,  that  a  reasonable 
man  would  expect  to  see  as  a  manifestation  of  the 
living  God.  Surely  it  would  be  not  merely  the 
shape  of  a  living  thing,  but  a  living  shape.  Clearly 
so.  "Well  then,  what  have  we  come  to?  A  form 
is  expected?  Yes.  Of  a  man?  Yes.  Living? 
Yes.  Why,  what  is  that  but  just  a  man?  And 
there  he  isl  There  He  stands,  eyes  beaming  with 
highest  intelligence,  face  wreathed  in  the  most 
attractive  smile,  heart  beating  with  the  warmest 
love,  voice  soft  and  tremulous  with  suppressed  emo- 
tion, as  in  tenderest  tones  He  speaks  and  says,  in 
answer  to  the  skeptical  disciple's  appeal:  "  Have  I 
been  so  long  time  with  you  and  yet  hast  thou  not 
known  me,  Philip?  He  that  hath  seen  Me  hath 
seen  the  Father." 

Suppose,  now,  we  approach  the  subject  on  an- 


I. 


I 


t 


h 


,vi- 


(    <! 


*,  :  -i 


'  K 


70 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


other  side.  Wliat  is  wanted  is  a  revelation  (Df  God 
as  near  as  possible  in  definiteness  and  intelligibility 
to  the  revelation  which  we  make  of  onrselves  to 
one  another.  Well,  how  do  we  get  to  know  one 
another?  Let  us  try  several  ways  and  see  which 
is  the  best  and  most  promising.  Can  you  get  to 
know  a  man  by  seeing  specimens  of  his  workman- 
ship? Not  well.  If  you  go  into  a  carpenter-shop 
when  the  carpenter  is  not  there,  you  can  learn  some- 
thing about  the  man  no  doubt.  You  can  judge 
somewhat  of  his  skill;  and,  after  you  have  looked 
all  around  and  examined  as  carefully  as  you  can 
every  specimen  of  his  handicraft  you  can  find,  you 
may  be  able  to  tell  something  about  his  hands  and 
a  little  about  his  head;  but  you  can  scarcely  say 
that  you  k'low  him.  Or,  if  you  go  into  an  artist's 
studio  when  the  artist  is  not  there,  and  look  at  his 
works  as  they  are  disposed  about  the  room,  you 
may  be  able  to  pronounce  some  opinion  on  the  * 
artist,  but  you  can  scarcely  say  you  know  the  man. 
It  is  only  a  very  little  way  that  the  sight  of  a  per- 
son's works  will  carry  you  in  getting  to  know  him. 
Will  it  do  to  tell  us  words  he  has  spoken?  This 
is  a  good  deal  better.  You  can  learn  a  great  deal 
more  about  a  person  from  the  words  he  speaks  than 
from  the  things  he  makes.  From  written  words 
you  can  learn  something.    From  spoken  words  you 


\  ! 
I 

ii 


EEVELATION    OF   GOD   IN    A   HUMAN    LIFE.   71 

can  learn  more.  But  even  words,  however  nmch  of 
revelation  there  is  in  them,  are  not  the  ultimate  reve- 
lation of  a  person.  If  all  you  know  of  a  person  is  sim- 
ply what  he  says,  your  knowledge  is  still  imperfect. 

What  is  wanted  besides?  You  want  to  know 
how  he  acts.  Besides  his  works  and  his  words,  you 
want  to  see  his  doings,  his  conduct  day  by  day. 
That  is  the  ultimate  revelation  of  i*  man.  To  know 
him  thoroughly  you  must  have  him  live  before 
you,  you  must  see  how  he  bears  himself  amid  the 
vicissitudes  of  life,  in  itj  trials  and  temptations,  its 
joys  and  sorrows.  To  what  does  all  this  bring  us? 
Just  to  the  same  point  which  we  have  reached 
already  by  other  roads:  that  if  we  are  to  have  a 
•pvela-ion  of  our  lather  God,  such  as  our  nature 
Uw^vefl  and  needs,  it  must  be  in  a  life,  a  life  like 
to  our  own — a  human  life. 

You  see,  then,  how  unreasoning  and  how  unrea- 
sonable is  the  prejudice  so  common  among  skeptics, 
that  it  is  an  extremely  improbable  thing  that  God 
would  reveal  himself  in  a  human  life.  It  is  just 
the  reverse.  It  is  extremely  probable  on  principles 
of  reason  alone. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  there  are  difficulties  in- 
volved in  the  thought  of  "  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh."  How  could  it  be  otherwise?  But  it  will 
be  found  that  all  these  difficulties  resolve  themselves 


ir 
ii 


i: 


'  I 


V 

i.        i 


72 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


into  the  necessary  conditions  of  revelation  with 
which  we  set  out,  viz.,  self-limitation,  and  conde- 
scension to  our  weakness.  These  conditions,  of 
course,  limit  the  extent  of  the  revelation.  For 
example,  w^  cannot  say  that  in  the  man  Christ 
Jesus  there  wsl£  any  revelation  of  the  omnipresence 
of  God.  The  self-limitation  involved  in  the  revela- 
tion rendered  that  an  impossibility.  And  in  the 
same  way  we  can  not  say  that  the  human  weaknesses 
of  Jesus  of  Kazareth  were  a  revelation  of  God. 
These  were  a  part  of  the  necessary  condescension 
to  meet  our  wants.  The  special  character  of  the 
revelation  of  God  that  comes  to  us  through  the 
human  life  of  Christ  is  a  revelation  of  the  mind 
and  heart  of  God,  a  revelation  of  law  and  love. 
"  Grace  and  truth  came  bv  Jesus  Christ."  And 
a  human  life  was  an  abundantly  adequate  medium, 
and  not  only  so,  but  the  best  conceivable  medium 
for  revealing  these. 

One  word  as  to  the  charge  of  anthropomorphism, 
i.  e.,  the  supposed  error  of  constructing  the  idea  of 
God  out  ot  human  attributes.  In  order  to  keep 
clear  of  danger  iu  this  direction,  we  have  only  to 
distinguish  between  the  attributing  to  God  of  hu- 
man imperfections  and  weaknesses,  which  Christian- 
ity never  does,  and  the  attributing  to  Him  of  per- 
fections which  the  human  mind  can  conceive  in- 


i  »v 


BEVELATION   OF   GOD   IN   A   HUMAN   LIFE.  73 

deed,  but  cannot  claim  as  properly  its  own.  It  is 
quite  true  we  must  get  our  first  ideas  of  power  and 
wisdom  and  love  and  all  the  rest,  from  our  own 
hearts;  but  far  from  its  being  unreasonable  to 
ascribe  all  these  in  their  perfection  to  the  Divine 
Being,  the  very  fact  that  we  have  the  conception  of 
the  infinite  and  the  perfect  in  connection  with  theie, 
points,  as  we  have  already  seen,  to  One  in  whom  all 
these  ideals  are  realized.  And  if,  as  our  Bible  tells 
ufc,  and  as  even  reason  itself  suggests,  we  pre  made 
in  the  image  of  God,  we  have  not  only  a  justification, 
but  a  rationale  of  the  true,  as  distinguished  from 
the  false,  anthropomorphism. 

We  have  devoted  our  attention  entirely,  in  this  lec- 
ture, to  proving  that  the  revelation  of  God  in  a  human 
life,  far  from  being  the  improbable  and  incredible 
thing  which  so  many  infidels  represent  it  to  be,  is 
natural,  reasonable,  and  probable  in  a  high  degree. 
This,  of  course,  does  not  prove  that  God  is  revealed 
in  Christ,  but  it  prepares  the  way  for  it.  And  if 
we  find,  as  1  am  sure  we  shall,  that  the  man  Christ 
Jesus,  who  certainly  claimed  to  be  a  revelation  of 
God,  gave  all  the  evidence  that  we  could  ask  of  His 
divine  mission,  it  will  be  not  only  reasonable  to  ad- 
mit His  claim  and  receive  Him  as  '^  God  manifest 
in  the  flesh,"  but  highly  unreasonable  to  reject  it. 
The  credentials  of  Jesus  of  l!Tazaret}\,  then,  will  be 
our  next  subject. 


>\ 


m 


r^i 


t  = 


li    i 


tl 


LECTURE    V. 


CREDENTIALS   01 


I  IE   OHRIST. 


Let  me  remind  you  that  up  to  the  point  we  have 
readied  in  our  arguments,  no  use  has  been  made 
of  any  part  of  the  Bible.  Passages  have  been  re- 
ferred to  from  time  to  time,  but  only  in  the  way  of 
illustration;  no  argument  has  been  built  upon  any 
of  them.  And  in  this  way  we  have  found  abund- 
ant and  sufficient  reasons  for  believina:  in  the  exist- 
ence  and  agency  of  God,  and  for  expecting  some 
additional  revelation  to  answer  the  questions  which 
we  can  not  but  raise  about  Him,  and  to  meet  wants  of 
our  nature  which  can  not  othti  wise  be  provided  for; 
and,  furthermore,  on  principles  of  reason  alone, 
we  have  discovered  that  such  a  revelation  can  be 
better  given  through  the  medium  of  a  human  life 
than  in  any  other  conceivable  way. 

And  now  we  are  confronted  with  the  fact  that 
one  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  who  lived  a  little  more  than 
eighteen  centuries  ago,  claimed  to  bring  us  just  such 
a  revelation;  and  we  have  to  consider  whether  His 

('4) 


V. 


CREDENTIALS   OF   THE   CHRIST, 


75 


claim  be  such  that  wc  can  reasonably  entertain  it. 
This  brings  ns  uito  the  region  of  lii story,  and  leads 
us  '0  enqniic  what  information  we  can  get  concern- 
in. <^  the  life  of  the  claimant.  And  here  w^e  Hud, 
among  Tnan_)  inferior  authors,  four  wlio  undertake 
tc  tell  us  what  we  want  to  know  about  this  life. 
These  four  are  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 
They  happen  to  be  in  our  day  bound  up  witli  'her 
authors  in  a  book  which  we  call  the  Bible;  buu  ,  o 
have  nothing  to  do  with  that  just  now.  Ou^  in- 
quiry has  not  Ijd  us  yet  to  the  inspiration  <i  the 
Scriptures,  so  we  make  no  use  of  that  doci  or;  we 
simply  deal  with  these  documents,  as  we  do  with 
any  other  ancient  writings  that  have  boon  handed 
down  to  us.  We  know  they  could  not  have  been 
concocted  in  this  centurv,  for  all  throuo-h  last  cen- 
tury  there  are  books  wdiich  everybody  knows  to 
have  been  written  then,  that  refer  to  them,  and 
quote  from  them.  And  so  with  the  century  before; 
and  so  back  and  back,  till  we  come  close  to  the 
time  when  the}-  profess  to  have  been  written,  and 
then  the  quotations  and  allusions  cease.  So  we 
know  that  these  four  books  were  WTitten  by  men 
who  lived  at  or  near  the  time  when  the  events  are 
said  to  have  taken  place.  ISTow  let  us  look  into 
them  and  see  if  we  can  find  out  wdiat  kind  of 
men  they  were.     Clearly  they  could  not  have  been 


3 


\y 


II' 


,    f. 


\\ 


4  ;. 


76 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


bad  men,  for  bad  men  could  not  have  written  if  they 
would,  and  would  not  have  written  if  they  could, 
such  books  as  these.  They  were  evidently  simple- 
minded  men;  for,  if  ever  there  were  simplicity  and 
straightforwardness  in  literature,  it  is  there.  They 
manifestly  were  not  fools,  or  there  w^ould  have  been 
some  trace  of  folly  in  their  books.  It  seems  abund- 
antly evident,  and  more  and  more  so,  the  more  we 
examine  their  writings,  that  they  were  men  w^ho  in- 
tended to  tell  the  truth,  who  tried  their  best  to  tell 
the  truth,  and  who  therefore  are,  in  the  main,  to 
be  believed.  They  are  certainly  to  be  believed  in 
everything  about  which  they  had  a  fair  opportu- 
nity of  judging.  I'iiere  mav  be  some  things,  as,  for 
instance,  where  one  of  them  speaks  about  water  be- 
ing changed  into  wine,  where  it  would  be  quite 
reasonable  to  suppose,  on  mere  historical  grounds, 
that  the  author  might  be  mistaken;  but,  in  the 
main,  and  on  all  matters  concerning  which  they  had 
both  the  ability  and  the  opportunity  to  inform 
themselves,  we  may  give  credit  to  what  they  say. 
This  is  all  we  ask  at  present;  and  I  do  not  believe 
that  there  is  a  historical  critic  of  any  standing  to- 
day who  does  not  accept  the  biographies  of  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke,  at  least,  as  in  the  main  correct  and 
true.  And  remember,  the  witnesses  are  independ- 
ent of  one  another,  though  of  course  they  had  com- 


m 


CREDENTIALS   OF   THE   CHRIST. 


77 


mon  sources  of  information.  No  one  who  has  the 
least  pretension  to  critical  ability  will  say  that  it 
was  one  man  who  wrote  all  the  four,  or  even  any 
two  of  them.  They  all  differ  in  style.  A. id  then 
while  there  is  thorough  harmony  in  all  essentials, 
there  are  those  constant  variations  in  detail,  which 
prove  that  they  did  not  even  compare  notes  so  as 
to  insure  minute  correspondence  before  issuing 
their  separate  works. 

Now,  beyond  all  question,  as  a  simple  matter  of 
history,  Jesus  of  Nazareth  did  claim  to  have  come 
to  earth  as  the  revealer  of  man's  unseen  God  and 
Father.  We  have  already  seen  that  it  is  not  at  all 
unlikely  that  such  an  one  as  He  claimed  to  be  should 
appear  upon  earth.  But  it  remains  to  be  seen 
whether  the  life  of  Jesus  was  in  all  respects  what 
we  shoald  reasonably  expect  it  to  be,  provided  His 
claim  was  well  founded.  Did  He  justify  his  claim 
to  be  the  Christ  of  God,  or  was  it  so  little  supported 
by  evidence  that  no  reasonable  man  should  pay  the 
slightest  attention  to  it?  That  is  the  question  for 
us  now;  and  if  we  find  that  He  has  given  us  all 
the  evidence  we  could  reasonably  expect  for  the 
reality  of  His  mission,  surely  every  reasonable  man 
should  be  well  satisfied. 

Let  us,  then,  proceed  to  the  inqr.iry  as  to  what 
we  might  reasonably  expect  in  the  way  of  evidence 


:  I 


'.r 


( ' 


1 1 1 


? 


hr 


i-h-, 


T8 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


fl'     < 


ii 


on  the  part  of  such  :ui  one  as  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
claimed  to  be.  To  Leujin  witli,  you  wouUl  uot  ex- 
pect anytliing  remai'kablo  in  His  personal  appear- 
ance. You  would  expect  Ilini  to  be  nothin<^  tnoro 
nor  less  than  atypical  man — not  one  to  be  exhibited 
or  to  exhibit  himself  as  a  curiosity,  but  one  who 
could  go  among  his  fellow  men  without  exciting 
attention  by  his  appearance,  or  any  more  attention 
than  a  remarkably  good  man  might  attract  by  the 
observed  benevolence  of  his  countenance  and  the 
calmness  and  dignity  of  his  bearing.  So  you  see  it 
would  be  quite  possible  for  multitudes  to  see  Ilim 
without  recognizing  Ilim.  In  some  pictures  you 
see  the  Christ  distinguished  from  other  men  by  a 
halo  around  His  head.  Suppose  He  had  actually 
come  with  some  such  distinguishing  halo,  w^ould  it 
have  been  natural?  What  other  emotion  would  it 
have  excited  in  the  minds  of  the  multitude  than 
the  idlest  of  all  curiosity?  AVe  might,  indeed, 
expect  that  on  occasion  something  of  the  divine 
glory  should  shine  through;  and  there  are  not  want- 
ing indications  that  this  was  sometimes  the  case,  as 
notably  on  the  occasion  of  tlie  Transfiguration;  but 
as  a  rule,  we  should  expect  His  appearance  to  have 
been  just  that  of  a  man,  a  typical  man. 

And  the  same  considerations   are  applicable  to 
the  length  of  His  life.     He  lived  just  the  average 


CEEDENTIALa   OF  THE   CHRIST. 


79 


I       i 


lifetime  of  an  ordinary  generation.  He  mig-lit  in- 
deed have  lived  on  till  now.  But  would  that  have 
been  at  all  natural?  "Would  it  not  have  been  just  as 
much  out  of  taste  and  out  of  reason  that  He  should 
live  to  a  prodigious  age,  as  that  He  should  grow  to 
a  prodigious  stature?  In  either  case  He  wo'ilJ  not 
have  been  a  man,  but  only  a  ])rodigy.  If  He  liad 
either  lived  on,  postponing  His  death  till  the  end 
of  the  ages,  or  had  come  back  in  human  form  after 
His  death  to  stay  till  the  end  of  the  world,  there 
would  have  been  this  small  advantage:  that  in  each 
succeeding  generation  some  rich  people  who  could 
afibrd  to  travel,  would  have  had  the  opportunity  of 
seeing  Him  with  their  bodily  eyes;  but  everything 
else  was  against  it,  and  especially  this,  that  in  either 
case  He  would  have  ceased  to  be  really  and  truly 
and  typically  a  man ;  He  could  not  have  claimed 
His  favorite  designation,  "  the  Son  of  Man."  The 
fact  that  there  was  nothing  peculiar  either  in  the 
appearance  or  stature  or  age  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
is  not  at  all  a_ainst  His  claim  to  be  the  Kevealer  of 
the  Father. 

How,  then,  is  such  an  one  to  be  recognized  at  all? 
The  answer  seems  easv.  Thou2:li  it  is  not  natural 
or  reasonable  to  expect  Him  to  be  taller  than  oilier 
men,  it  is  natural  to  expect  that  He  will  exceed 
them  in  wisdom  and  in  power,  and,  though  wc  may 


.tf 


•f 


\i 


:        I 


i''l 


80 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


not  reasonably  expect  that  He  will  live  a  longer 
life  than  other  men,  we  do  expect  that  He  will  live 
a  better  one,  even  a  perfectly  holy  life.  These, 
then,  are  the  credentials  we  should  reasonably 
expect:  superior  wisdom,  superior  power,  and 
superior  purity ;  and  all  these  so  much  superior  that 
it  would  not  be  reasonable  to  assign  them  to  mere 
human  genius,  human  strength,  and  human  virtue. 
We  shall  take  the  last  of  these  first,  viz.,  the 
cliaracter  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  And  here  no  man 
of  intelligence  and  candor  will  deny  that  we  find 
all  that  we  could  expect  of  such  an  one  as  He 
claimed  to  be.  You  cannot  think  of  a  single  excel- 
lence of  charact^^r  that  does  not  shine  out  in  that 
wonderful  life.  If  you  take  single  features  sepa- 
rately, you  may  be  able  to  think  of  some  of  earth's 
great  ones  whom  you  could  put  beside  Him.  But, 
when  you  take  the  combination  of  them  all,  He 
manifestly  stands  absolutely  alone.  Not  only  is 
there  not  in  all  history  one  single  person  that  can 
stand  beside  him;  but  there  is  not  in  all  fiction  a 
single  ideal  character  that  will  bear  comparison. 
Even  such  distinguished  character  painters  as 
Shakspeare,  for  example,  or  George  Eliot  in  our 
own  time,  who  have  had  all  the  advantage  of  His 
character  to  model  after,  do  not  in  their  loftiest 
creations  approach  to  the  elevation  and  grandeur  of 


CREDENTIALS   OF   THE   CHRIST. 


81 


the  character  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  as  depicted  in 
the  simple  language  of  the  four  Evangelists. 

Now  consider  for  a  moment  what  a  strong  posi- 
tion we  have  here.  We  could  even  build  an  argu- 
ment, apart  from  historical  evidence,  at  this  point. 
There  we  have  before  us  the  life  of  Christ  by 
Matthew.  However  it  came  there,  there  it  is. 
That  life  was  either  a  creation  of  Matthew,  as 
Hamlet  was  a  creation  of  Shakspeare,  or  else  it  is 
a  true  portraits  le  of  what  Christ  actually  was.  If 
it  was  a  creation  of  Matthew's  genius,  then  this 
Matthew,  who  seems  to  have  been  quite  an  obscure 
man,  must  have  had  a  superhuman  genius,  so  that 
even  Shakspeare  himself  could  not  compare  with 
him.  Do  you  believe  that?  And  even  if  you 
could,  the  question  would  still  remain:  How  could 
it  happen  that  there  should  be  four  men  of  such 
transcendent  genius  at  the  same  time,  whose  crea- 
tive powers  all  led  them  to  produce  the  same  char- 
acter from  different  points  of  view,  and  yet  these 
same  men  be  all  unknown  to  fame  in  any  other 
way?  The  idea  is  in  the  last  degree  absurd.  No- 
body believes  it  or  can  believe  it.  Since,  then,  the 
character  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  not,  as  it  cer- 
tainly could  not  be,  the  creation  of  these  four  men, 
it  follows  that  it  is  a  true  portraiture  of  what  this 
Jesus  actually  was.     And  if  the  very  conception  of 


■  I 


1 1 


h\  .i 


V  ' 


I 


I,  .  1. 


',\. 


H 

if  ' 


i ',' 


If 


!i. 


82 


THE    FOUNDATION'S. 


sncli  a  character  cannot  be  accounted  for  except  on 
the  supposition  of  superhuman  genius,  how  much 
less  can  the  actual  living  of  such,  a  life  be  accounted 
for  on  any  other  supposition,  than  that  He  wlio 
lived  it  was  indeed  what  He  solemnly  claimed  to 
be,  "the  Christ  of  God?" 

The  evidence  of  the  divine  mission  of  Jesus, 
which  His  character  furnishes,  is  one  which  grows 
upon  you  more  and  more,  the  more  you  examine  in- 
to it.  It  is  quite  possible  to  rei  d  the  four  gospels 
over  and  over  again  without  discovering  the  won- 
ders of  the  character  which  they  depict.  But  let 
any  one  make  it  a  matter  of  earnest  thought  and  care- 
ful study,  and  he  will  continually  discover  new  feat- 
ures to  admire,  and  new  combinations  of  excellencies 
that  are  never  found  in  combination  in  other  lives. 
Kead  Horace  Bushnell's  wonderful  little  monograph 
on  the  character  of  Jesus  (which  first  appeared  as 
one  of  the  chapters  in  his  book  on  "  ISTature  and  the 
Supernatural,"  but  has  since  been  published  sepa- 
rately), and  see  if  you  are  not  absolutely  shut  up  to 
the  conclusion,  which  he  draws,  that  the  character 
of  Jesus  alone  forbids  His  possible  classifict',tion 
with  men.  Being  such  a  man  as  Ho  was.  He  must 
have  been  more  than  man;  He  must  have  been 
what  He  claimed  to  be.  His  character  is,  in  the 
highest  degree,  a  credential  of  His  claim. 


eil 


CTtEDENTI  ILS    OF   THE   CHRIST. 


83 


■  '■  \ 


From  His  life  we  pass  to  His  words.  Claimins^, 
as  lie  does,  to  be  the  Kevealer  of  God,  we  should 
reasonably  expect  not  only  a  superior  character, 
but  superior  wisdom.  If  what  he  says  be  poor, 
empty,  or  of  little  consequence,  or  if  it  be  only  a 
reflection  of  the  mind  of  liisage,  wutli  all  its  errors 
and  imperfections  traceable  through  it,  then  we  may 
set  aside  his  claim,  because  his  spoken  words  do  not 
bear  it  out.  Eut  is  it  so?  Do  not  his  spoken  words 
bear  it  out?  Can  it  not  be  said  with  as  great  emphasis 
as  ever,  after  so  many  centuries  of  progress,  "  J^ever 
man  spake  like  this  man  % "  Take  the  first  discourse 
we  meet  with  as  we  turn  the  pages  of  the  first  evan- 
gelist, the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Is  it  feeble?  Is 
it  poor?  Does  it  savour  of  the  age  when  it  was 
spoken  ?  Is  it  not  as  fresh  as  ever  to-day  ?  Is  there 
anything  in  all  literature  that  can  be  placed  beside 
it?  Does  not  every  line  of  it  bear  out  His  claim  to 
Bpea':  in  the  name  of  God?  Or  take  the  last  dis- 
course in  the  upper  room,  beginning,  "  Let  not 
your  heart  be  troubled."  Where  can  you  find  any- 
thing in  all  literature  outside  of  the  Bible,  that  has 
been  cherished  as  these  words  have  been  cherished, 
or  that  has  brought  such  consolation  to  millions  of 
troubled  hearts?  From  first  to  last  the  words  He 
speaks  amply  justify  His  claim. 

Think,  too,  how  easily  these  words  Oi.  wisdom 


- 1  : 


'  I  . 


II 


jl 


■;»M 


84 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


hi 

3!i! 
.1:; 


fall  from  II im.  lie  doc;s  not  retire  to  His  study 
(study  He  seems  to  have  had  none)  and  read  what 
the  philosophers  before  Him  had  written,  and  pain- 
fully think  out  a  system  of  truth.  lie  stands  on  the 
grassy  plain  or  in  the  little  boat  beside  the  shore,  or 
anywhere,  and  pours  out  without  the  slightest  effort, 
though  only  turned  thirty,  such  words  of  heavenly 
wisdom,  as  the  greatest  of  the  philosophers,  after  a 
long  life  given  to  study  and  meditation,  or  even  all 
the  philosophers  of  the  world  together,  after  all 
their  labor,  had  never  been  able  to  equal.  Does 
not  this,  too,  correspond  with  His  claim?  He 
needs  no  stimulus  of  an  appreciative  at4.dience,  even, 
to  draw  out  His  powers.  When  He  speaks  to  an  ob- 
scure woman,  who  has  eome  to  draw  water  at  the 
well,  where  He  is  resting  in  the  heat  of  the  day, 
His  words  are  as  full  of  tho-ught  and  heave^nly  wis- 
dom as  when  the  great  multitudes  are  thrr/nging 
around  Him.  In  fact,  every  time  He  opens  His 
mouth,  He  gives  new  evidence  that  He  is  what  He 
claims  to  be. 

Here,  again,  the  evidence  grows  upon  you  the 
more  you  study  it.  There  is  far  more  in  the  words 
of  Jesus  tluiD  r^t  ^^rt  appears.  They  are  germinal 
words.  They  a;  :  full  of  seeds  of  richest  thought. 
They  unfold  li  v  lug  principles.  Ihe  thouglit  is  often 
the  deepest  v/ir  n  the  form  is  the  simplest.     Hence 


CREDENTIALS   OF   THE   CHRIST. 


85 


the  necessity  of  attention  and  study,  to  be  able  to 
appreciate  the  evidence  which  His  words  furnish  of 
His  divine  mission.  Yet  how  few  of  the  average 
run  of  skeptics  give  a^.y  attention  at  all  to  the 
words  of  Christ;  and  even  ihe  great  skeptical  lead- 
ers will  find  excuses  for  passing  them  by,  without 
any  consideration.  Do  you  liappen  to  know  how 
Mill  steers  clear  of  all  the  e\  idence  we  have  been 
considering?  He  does  it  very  easily,  indeed.  He 
disposes  of  it  in  a  single  sentence.  Htjre  it  is: 
"  We  cannot  have  conclusive  reason  for  believing 
that  the  human  faculties  ^v  :;rc  incompetent  to  find 
out  moral  doctrines  of  whlv^.h  the  human  faculties 
can  perceive  and  recognize  the  excellence."  By 
that  single  oracular  utterance  he  disposes  of  all  the 
internal  evidences  of  Christianity.  It  is  positively 
all  the  notice  he  takes  (in  his  celebrated  Essay  on 
Revelation)  of  the  entire  array  of  the  internal  i- 
dences,  the  very  presentation  of  which,  in  e^  i  a 
brief  manner,  would  take  a  volume,  Xow  1  us 
look  for  a  moment  at  the  reason  he  gives  f^r  dis- 
missing them  so  summarily,  and  find  out,  if  re  can, 
what  it  amounts  to.  His  idea  seems  to  be,  that 
whatever  a  set  of  faculties  can  appreciate,  that  they 
can  produce.  The  very  fact  that  the  human  mind 
can  appreciate  the  wisdom  of  the  utterancvs  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  proves  that  the  human  mind 


i  ( 


II 


|ir 


«?W*-i4«H«#->*S*ftl 


•'*^-. 


86 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


1 


co'ild  have  j)roclnced  them.  Do  you  tliink  that  a  lair 
inference?  We  are  all  so  constituted  that  our  pow- 
ers of  appreciation  very  largely  exceed  our  powers 
of  oripjination.  You,  and  I,  and  everybody  can  ap- 
preciate a  thousand  things  that  we  never  could 
have  originated;  and  what  is  true  of  each  individual 
of  the  race  cannot  but  be  true  of  the  race  as  a  whole; 
and  therefore  it  is  absurd  to  say  that  because  the  hu- 
man mind  can  appreciate  what  Christ  has  revealed,^ 
therefore  the  human  mind  could  have  originated  it. 
Do  you  think  so  acute  a  man  would  have  set  aside 
the  internal  evidences  in  such  a  fashion,  if  he  had 
been  r>\Ae  fairly  to  deal  with  them? 

And  now  we  have  seen,  that  the  life  of  Jesus  of 
iS^azareth  was  such  as  fully  to  correspond  with  His 
claim,  and  further,  that  the  words  which  He  sjDoke, 
as  well  as  the  \v  ay  in  which  He  spoke  them,  were 
also  in  fullest  harmony — the  one  exhibiting  a  char- 
acter beyond  the  range  of  human  virtue,  and  the 
other  a  wisdom  beyond  the  range  of  human  genius. 
Is  there  anvthino^  more?  Is  there  anvthiui^  else 
that  such  an  one  as  He  claimed  to  be  could  offer  as 

•It  maybe  said  that  in  the  department  of  "  moral  doctrines"  our  pow- 
ers of  appreciation  are  not  so  far  removed  from  our  powers  of  origina- 
tion ;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  internal  evidences  are  not 
confined  to  the  superior  ethics  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  it  does  not 
look  very  ingenuous  to  set  them  all  aside  by  a  carefully  worded  state- 
ment applicable  only  to  a  part  of  the  whole,  and  very  doubtful  even  in 
that  limited  application. 


;i 


CREDENTIALS   OF   THE   CHRIST. 


^7 


a  credential  of  His  claim?  There  is.  lie  might 
exhibit  superhuman  power.  lie  might  do  things 
which  were  clearly  beyond  the  ability  of  ordinary 
men.  It  will  only  then  be  in  keeping  with  all  the 
rest,  and  in  keeping  with  what  we  should  expect  of 
One  who  came  on  such  a  mission  as  lie  professed  to 
come  on,  if  we  find  Him  doing  as  w^ell  as  saying 
extraordinary  things.  But  this  opens  so  large  a 
question  that  we  must  take  it  up  separately.  This 
will  give  us  then  as  our  next  subject;  "  The  Mira- 
cles of  the  Gospel." 


'  'I 


■t' 


M 


r 


2 


LECTUEE  VL 


MIRACLES^  OF   THE   GOSPEL. 


It  is  generally  felt  in  these  days  that  the  iniraclea 
recorded  in  the  gospels,  instead  of  being  a  bulwark 
to  Christianity,  are  a  burden  to  it.  Instead  of 
being  evidence  for  it,  they  are  accepted  as  evidence 
against  it.  And  there  are  not  a  few  who  want  no 
other  evidence  against  Christianity  than  this.  They 
say:  "Look  at  th 3  fables  in  these  books,  stories 
that  nobody  would  ()elieve,  if  they  were  reported  as 
occurring  now;  we  can  not  believe  them,  and,  what 
is  more,  we  can  not  believe  the  men  tliat  would 
tell  such  stories  as  these — the  whole  thing  is  fable." 
And  this  position  is  greatly  strengthened  by  the 
idea  which  is  so  diligently  fostered  in  much  of  the 

*It  ip  important  to  remember  that  in  this  discussion  It  is  not  necessary 
to  give  a  scientific  definition  of  miracle.  It  is  enougli  to  know  that 
Christ  put  forth  superhuman  power.  It  is  of  no  consequence  wt  ether 
He  used  for  the  purpose  some  force  of  the  spiritual  world  operating 
according  to  spiritual  law  and  order,  or  whether  He  used  some  physical 
agency  unknown  to  man,  or  whether  He  produced  the  effect  by  direct 
volition  without  the  intervention  of  any  occult  agency,  whether  phys- 
ical or  spiritual ;  all  that  is  essential  is  the  superhun^an  power  manifest 
in  the  result.    It  would  tend  very  much  to  simplify  this  whole  discus- 

(88) 


MIRACLES   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 


89 


current  literature  of  the  time,  that  this  estimate  of 
the  gospel  miracles  is  due  to  superior  enlighten- 
ment. Lecky's  "  History  of  Rationalism"  has  done 
good  service  here.  He  shows  how  the  belief  in 
witchcmtl,  and  in  the  foolish  miracles  of  mediseval 
times,  was  not  really  argued  out  of  existence,  but 
simply  faded  away,  like  mists  before  the  rising  sun 
of  general  enlightenment;  and  it  is  generally 
assumed  and  often  stated,  that  the  miracles  of  the 
gospel  are  destined  to  a  like  fate  in  due  course  of 
time ;  from  which  it  follows,  that  those  who  now  re- 
ject the  miracles  of  the  gospel  are  in  the  vanguard 
of  advancing  thought,  which  is  exceedingly  flatter- 
ing, of  course,  to  those  who  occupy  this  high  intel- 
lectual position.  It  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at, 
theuj  that  many  should  be  eager  to  step  up  to  an 
eminence  so  easily  attained. 

Now,  for  the  very  reason  that  the  whole  tendency 
and  drift  of  the  times  is  against  belief  in  miracles 
of  any  kind,  it  becomes  us  to  see  that  we  do  not 
merely  drift  with  the  tide,  but  look  at  the  matter 
for  ourselves.  If  the  miracles  of  the  gospels  must 
be  relegated  to  the  limbo  of  witchcraft  and  mediaeval 

sion,  if,  instead  of  attempting  to  defend  some  particular  notion  we  may 
have  of  the  interior  nature  of  a  miracle,  we  would  be  content  with  the 
simple  way  in  which  Christ  Himself  put  it  when  He  said,  "  If  I  had  not 
done  among  them  the  works  that  none  other  man  did,  they  had  not  had 
sin."  The  fact  is,  that  many  of  the  arguments  supposed  to  lie  against 
miracles  are  only  arguments  against  certain  definitions  of  a  mirtttie. 


i. 


90 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


nonsense,  let  us  at  all  events  have  an  intelligent 
knowledge  of  the  reasons  for  so  disposing  of  tliem. 
It  is not^ enough  to  say,  "the great  nineteenth  cen- 
tury says  so,  and  therefore  it  must  be."  We  object 
to  mere  authority,  even  though  it  be  supposed  to  be 
the  authority  of  a  century;  whole  centuries  have 
been  wrong  before  this  time.  We  want  reason. 
Ard  It  iij  to  reason  as  against  prejudice  that  we  in- 
tend to  appeal  in  discussing  this  subject. 

Let  us  first  inquire  how  much  of  reason  there  is 
in  the  almost  irresistible  prejudice  against  miracles, 
which  is  so  widely  diffused  in  these  days.  We 
speak  of  it  as  a  prejudice,  not  to  call  it  a  bad  name, 
but  simply  to  characterize  it  with  philosophical  ac- 
curacy. It  18  a  prejudice,  as  all  intelligent  and 
candid  skeptics  will  themselves  admit.  By  this  we 
mean  that  the  miraculous  facts  of  the  gospel  are  not 
rejected  because,  on  examination  of  the  evidence 
presented,  it  is  found  insufficient;  but  because  they 
are  judged  beforehand.  They  are  represented  as 
simply  incredible.  As  we  said  in  a  former  lecture, 
no  intelligent  skeptic  with  any  pretension  to  be 
considered  a  historical  critic,  denies  the  credibility 
of  the  evangelists  when  they  testify  to  ordinary  oc- 
currences; but  when  the  same  persons  testily  as 
clearly  and  assuredly  to  any  supernatural  fact,  even 
though  it  be  of  such  a.  nature  that  they  could  not 


MIRACLES   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 


91 


possibly  bo  inistaken,  they  aro  immediately  dls- 
credited.  Why?  Obviously  because  the  super- 
natural is  prejudiced.  It  is  disbelieved,  not  because 
the  witness  is  untrustworthy,  but  because  the  fact 
to  which  he  witnesses  is  supernatural.  It  is  a 
prejudice,  therefore,  strictly  speaking. 

But  a  prejudice  may  be  founded  on  reason.  And 
this  one  is,  to  some  extent.  It  is  quite  reasonable 
to  ask  more  evidence  for  a  wonderful  and  unheard- 
of  occurrence,  than  for  something  which  we  are 
quite  accustomed  to  see.  It  is  right  that  we  should 
approach  the  reputed  miraculous  with  a  prejudice 
against  it.  If  I  had  told  you  that  I  had  crossed 
Lake  Geneva  in  a  steamer  last  summer,  I  should 
have  reason  to  be  offended  if  you  did  not  believe 
me.  But  suppose  I  told  you  I  had  crossed  it  on 
foot,  I  should  then  have  no  reason  to  find  fault  with 
you  for  refusing  ine  credit.  We  admit,  then,  not 
only  that  a  prejudice  may  be  reasonable,  but  that 
the  prejudice  against  the  miraculous  is  reasonable 
to  a  certain  extent. 

But  to  what  extent?  This  is  the  great  question. 
And  we  maintain,  and  intend  to  prove,  that  the  mi- 
racles of  the  gospel  cannot  be  rejected  without  car- 
rying this  prejudice  to  an  unreasonable  extent. 

Let  us  look  into  some  of  the  forms  which  this 
prejudice  takes,  and  inquire  into  their  reasonable- 
ness. 


w 


ii 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


1^121    125 
■^  Ui   12.2 

1^   1^    12.0 

u 


U& 


lill^U4 

^ 6" 

> 

^j»- 
> 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STMIT 

WEBSTIR.N.Y.  14510 

(716)S72-4SC3 


'^ 


92 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


There  is,  first,  the  position  taken  by  many  that 
miracles  are  impossible,  and  that,  therefore,  no 
amount  of  evidence  whatever  could  certify  to  any- 
thing supernatural.  This  is  reasonable  ground  for 
atheists,  and  for  atheists  only.  If  there  be  a  God 
who  made  us.  He  can  surely  heal  a  sick  man  without 
going  through  any  process  known  to  medical  art. 
Our  position  on  the  subject  of  miracles  is  founded  on 
belief  in  God;  a  belief  for  which  we  have  already 
given  abundant  and  sufficient  reason.  It  is  custom- 
ary at  this  stage  to  deal  with  Hume's  celebrated 
argument  against  miracles.  But  as  this  has  been  so 
often  answered,  and  as  John  Stuart  Mill  himself  is 
one  of  those  who  show  its  invalidity  on  principles 
of  Theism,  ("Essays  on  Eeligion:"  H.  Holt  &  Co., 
p.  232,)  we  need  not  take  up  time  with  it. 

Again,  there  are  those  who  say  that  miracles  are 
to  be  uiterly  discredited,  because  they  are  an  inter- 
ference with  the  order  of  nature.  But  what  if  it  be 
rather  an  interference  with  disorder?  Was  it  not 
more  orderly,  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  term,  that 
a  blind  man  should  receive  sight,  than  that  he  should 
remain  blind?  The  order  of  nature,  be  it  remem- 
bered, is  not  the  only  order  in  the  universe.  There 
is  a  spiritual  order  to  which  we  spiritual  beings  be- 
long. As  a  rule,  the  spiritual  order  requires  that 
the  liAtural  order  be  regular,  uniform,  invariable. 


MIRACLES   OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


93 


If  it  were  not,  there  could  be  no  science,  and  there 
could  be  no  guarantee  for  any  enterprise  in  which 
free  agents  might  embark.  But  what  if,  on  occa- 
sion, the  spiritual  order  demanded  some  variation 
from  the  customary  order  of  nature?  The  variation 
would  not  be  a  variation  of  disorder  in  that  case, 
but  of  higher  order.  This  was  precisely  the  case 
with  regard  to  the  miracles  of  the  gospels.  It  will 
be  found,  upon  examination,  that  the  miracles  said 
to  have  been  wrought  by  Clirist  were  never  arbi- 
trary, but  always  in  obedience  to  some  higher  law. 
I  think  it  was  Jean  Paul  Richter  who  said:  "Mira- 
cles on  earth  are  nature  in  heaven." 

Another  reason  for  summarily  dismissing  all 
miracles  whatever  is,  that  to  admit  a  miracle  at  all 
is  to  dishonor  God,  as  if  His  universe  needed  mend- 
ing. To  this  some  have  replied  by  referring  to  such 
a  machine  as  Babbage's  calculator,  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  that,  though  at  given  times  numbers 
appear  out  of  all  previous  order,  it  does  not  follow 
that  everything  was  not  arranged  beforehand,  the 
exceptions  as  well  as  the  regularities ;  and  so  God 
may  have  had  the  exceptional  miracles  in  His  en- 
tire plan  as  well  as  all  that  was  manifestly  regular 
and  orderly.  But  we  prefer  a  shorter  and  more  di- 
rect answer,  viz.,  this:  That  though  the  universe 
may  need  no  mending,  we  men  do.    Do  we  not? 


(I 


94 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


i 


Is  there  no  such  thing  as  vice  or  crime?  Do  you 
believe  in  sin,  as  an  altogether  proper  and  orderly 
thing?  Is  there  no  mending  needed  there?  If  you 
are  perfectly  satisfied  with  things  as  they  are,  with 
State  street  on  a  Saturday  night  for  example,  then 
you  may  say  that  there  is  no  call  for  divine  inter- 
ference, and  no  need  of  divine  help.  But  if  you 
think  that  men  do  need  mending,  and  that  possibly 
some  of  us  respectable  people  would  be  the  better 
for  some  mending  too,  then  do  not  urge  this  as  a 
reason  for  putting  out  of  court,  without  a  hearing, 
those  works  of  healing  which  the  Christ  of  God 
wrought  for  poor,  sinning,  suffering  man. 

We  come  now  to  the  fourth  and  most  prevalent 
reason  for  summarily  dismissing  the  miracles  of 
the  gospel.  It  is  because  all  our  experience  is 
against  them.  Now  this  may  be  and  ought  to  be  a 
reason  for  special  care  in  considering  the  question, 
but  it  is  no  reason  for  dismissing  it  without  a  hear- 
ing. When  a  child  brought  up  in  the  tropics  is 
first  told  of  the  beautiful  white  crystals  that  fall 
from  the  heavens  In  northern  climes,  it  is  quite 
reasonable  that  he  should  be  skeptical  about  it.  But 
when  the  difference  of  the  conditions  is  explained, 
not  only  is  the  original  improbability  removed,  but 
the  way  is  prepared  for  seeing  that  it  may  be,  nay, 
that  it  must  be  so.    And  in  the  same  way,  when  we 


t\ 


MIRACLES  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


95 


hear  of  miracles  occurring  as  mere  prodigies,  with- 
out any  reason  for  expecting  them,  we  ought  to  be 
extremely  skeptical.  But  if  it  can  bo  shown  that 
at  any  time  in  the  world's  history  there  was  occasion 
for  them  and  reason  to  expect  them,  the  way  is 
prepared  for  at  least  considering,  whether  the  state- 
ments of  those  who  affirm  the  very  miracles  which 
reason  would  lead  us  to  expect  at  such  a  time,  may 
not  be  true. 

"We  fully  admit  that  a  miracle  is  an  improbable 
thing  in  itself.  This  can  not  be  denied.  If  it  were 
not  improbable,  it  would  not  be  a  miracle  at  all. 
But  that  which  is  improbable  in  itself  may  lose  very 
much  or  all  of  its  improbability  by  its  attendant 
circumstances.  The  improbability  of  miracles  is 
often  dealt  with  as  if  it  were  a  constant  quantity. 
The  gospel  miracles  are  cast  into  one  common  heap 
with  all  sorts  of  mediaeval  rubbish,  and  then  they 
are  all  set  aside  as  alike  improbable  and  unworthy 
of  consideration.     Is  that  honest?    Is  it  reasonable  ? 

The  honest  and  reasonable  way  to  do  is,  fairly  to 
estimate  the  probability  or  improbability  attaching 
to  the  gospel  miracles,  and  then  to  deal  with  the 
subject  on  its  merits  or  demerits,  as  the  case  may 
be.  "We  have  already  admitted  that  improbability 
is  a  reasonable  ground  for  a  certain  degree  of  sus- 
picion and  incredulity.    But  it  is  manifestly  unfair 


'\  I 


>.  a 


I  61 


m 


i 


96 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


to  take  the  improbability  attaching  to  one  thing — 
a  medioeval  miracle,  for  instance — and  make  it  the 
measure  of  suspicion  with  wliich  we  regard  another 
thing — a  miracle  of  Christ,  for  example. 

We  have  said  that  what  is  improbable  in  it- 
self may  lose  much,  or  even  all,  of  its  improbability 
by  attending  circumstances.  That  which  is  violent- 
ly improbable  to  a  limited  view  of  the  facts  of  the 
case,  as  when  an  inhabitant  of  the  tropics  disbe- 
lieves in  snow,  may  be  quite  probable  to  wider  ac- 
quaintance with  the  facts,  as  when  the  same  person 
learns  something  of  the  different  conditions  of  the 
temperate  and  frigid  zones.  N"ow  we  main  tain  that, 
not  only  do  the  circumstances  connected  with  the 
gospel  miracles  reduce  the  improbability  which 
they  have  in  themselves,  but  they  actually  turn  the 
scale  on  the  other  side.  Let  us  endeavor  to  make 
this  plain. 

We  have  seen  (Lecture  TV)  that  it  was  highly 
probable  that  God  should  give  to  man  a  revelation 
in  addition  to  that  which  nature  affords,  that  it  was 
in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  such  revelation 
should  be  given  through  the  medium  of  a  human  life; 
and  further,  that  it  was  surely  to  be  expected,  that 
any  one  sent  on  such  a  mission  should  exhibit,  as 
credentials  of  his  mission,  superhuman  excellence  of 
character,  superhuman  wisdom,  and  superhuman 


!■ 


MIRACLES  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


97 


■ 


power.  And  now,  when  we  find  One — the  only 
one  in  all  history  who  answers  to  these  conditions 
— One  who,  in  the  first  place,  claims  to  come  in  the 
name  of  God,  and  then  accredits  this  claim  bj  just 
the  character  and  the  teaching  we  should  expect, 
is  it,  I  ask,  unreasonable  to  think  that  such  an  One 
as  He  should  do  things  that  no  one  else  can  do? 
On  the  contrary,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  sup- 
pose that  he  should  not.  Why,  then,  in  the  name 
of  reason,  should  the  miracles  of  the  gospel  be  con- 
sidered as  evidence  against  it?  If  such  an  one  as 
I,  whom  you  know  to  be  no  better  or  greater  than 
other  men,  were  to  claim  to  heal  the  sick  by  a  word, 
it  would  be  an  incredible  claim,  and  it  would 
be  quite  proper  to  dismiss  it  without  any  consid- 
eration. But  is  it  not  entirely  different  when  He 
who  makes  the  claim  is  One  who  shows  Himself 
to  be  superluiman  in  all  other  respects,  and  espec- 
ially since  He  is  One  who  claims  to  bring  a  revela- 
tion from  heaven,  which,  according  to  one  of  the 
greatest  infidels  of  modern  times  (Mill  on  "  Revela- 
tion," p.  4),  *'  cannot  be  proved  divine,  .  .  .  un- 
less by  the  exhibition  of  supernatural  facts?" 
But  is  it  not  a  most  contradictory  position  to  take 
— first,  to  say  that  a  revelation  cannot  be  proved 
divine  except  by  the  exhibition  of  supernatural 
facts,  and  then  to  say  that  the  exhibition  of  super- 
7 


ii 


I 


I  I 


98 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


natural  facts  is  the  very  thing  that  kills  it?  Yet 
that  is  continually  done  by  the  infidelity  of  the 
day. 

Suppose,  now,  for  a  moment,  that,  after  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  had  announced  Himself  as  the  Christ,  a 
poor  leper  had  come  running  up  to  Him  with  the 
request,  "  Lord,  if  Thou  wilt.  Thou  canst  make  me 
clean;"  and,  instead  of  saying  as  our  gospels  repre- 
sent, "  I  will,  be  thou  clean,"  Pie  had  said,  "  I  can 
do  nothing  to  help  you,"  would  it  not  have  discred- 
ited His  mission?  Would  it  not  have  been  reason- 
able to  argue  thus:  if  He  cannot  help  a  leper 
out  of  his  leprosy,  what  reason  have  we  for  sup- 
posing that  He  can  help  a  sinner  out  of  his  sin? 
Yet  such  is  the  unreasonableness  of  modern  infi- 
delity, that  He  is  actually  discredited  because  He  is 
reported  to  have  done  the  very  thing  which  it  would 
have  discredited  Him  not  to  have  done. 

It  is  abundantly  evident,  then,  that  reason  de- 
mands a  fair  hearing  for  the  miracles  recorded  in 
the  gospels.  And  that  is  all  we  ask.  Give  them  a 
fair  hearing,  and  there  can  be  only  one  result,  us 
we  shall  presently  see.  And  herein  modern  infi- 
delity shows  its  wisdom  in  taking  its  stand  on  the 
threshold,  putting  the  whole  case  out  of  court,  and 
refusing  to  consider  it  on  its  merits.  If  the  case  of 
the  gospel  miracles  had  been  a  weak  one,  it  would 


I 


MIRACLES   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 


90 


not  have  been  necessary  to  resort  to  so  m any- 
learned  arguments  to  prove  tnat  the  idea  of  mira- 
cles ought  not  to  be  entertained  at  all.  If  the  evi- 
dence had  not  been  of  a  very  superior  kind,  it  would 
not  have  been  necessary  for  the  acutestof  the  oppo- 
sition to  maintain  so  earnestly,  tliat  miracles  are  so 
improbable  that  no  amount  of  evidence  should  bo 
accepted  as  sufficient. 

In  the  first  place  it  can  be  shown,  on  examina- 
tion of  the  miracles,  that  the  hypothesis  of  the  wit- 
nesses being  mistaken  is  quite  out  of  the  question. 
As  we  have  said,  we  could  have  seen  room  for  mis- 
take in  such  a  miracle  as  the  changing  of  water 
into  wine,  if  it  had  stood  alone,  but  the  great  ma- 
jority of  the  gospel  miracles  are  not  of  that  descrip- 
tion. Attempts  have  been  made  to  show  how  the 
reports  might  have  been  due  to  similar  mistakes 
all  through,  but  they  have  utterly  failed,  as  the 
great  German  infidel  Strauss  has  conclusively  shown, 
and  certainly  he  ought  to  be  good  authority  on  that 
subject. 

And  when  the  same  Strauss,  acknowledging  the 
defeat  of  rationalism  in  one  quarter,  runs  up  the 
standard  in  another,  by  propounding  and  advocat- 
ing his  famous  mythical  theory,  according  to  which 
the  reports  of  the  first  witnesses  have  been  cum- 
bered up  with  fables  that  in   the  course  of  years 


r 


i^ 


!    . 


100 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


have  grown  np  around  tlie  original  narrative;  not 
only  is  all  historical  evidence  against  it,  but  the 
miracles  themselves  refute  it.  An  examination  of 
them  shows  that,  instead  of  being  excrescences 
which  have  been  added  to  the  original  history,  they 
are  all  of  a  piece  with  it,  exhibiting  the  same  eleva- 
tion of  character  and  the  same  wealth  of  instruction 
which  the  discourses  do.  If  the  miracles  had  been 
spurious  and  the  discourses  genuine,  would  not  the 
difference  between  the  two  have  been  apparent? 
Can  you  see  it  ?  Read  Trench  on  the  Parables,  and 
then  read  the  same  author  on  the  Miracles,  and  see 
if  it  be  not  evident,  first,  that  the  miracles  are  as  full 
of  meaning  as  the  parables,  and,  next,  that  they  are 
full  of  the  same  meaning  as  the  parables.  And 
then,  after  you  have  read  and  studied  the  miracles 
of  the  gospel,  take  a  look  at  the  really  fabulous  mir- 
acles, such  as  are  found  in  "  the  Gospel  of  the  In- 
fancy" for  instance,  or  the  mediaeval  miracles,  or 
the  wonders  of  modern  spiritualism ;  and  you  will 
see  that  the  genuine  are  as  different  from  the  spur- 
ious as  day  is  from  night.  The  miracles  of  the 
gospel  are  most  appropriately  spoken  of  by  Christ 
and  by  the  evangelists  as  "  signs  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,"  and  certainly  they  do  bear  the  sign  man- 
ual of  heaven  upon  them;  whereas  the  miracles 
with  which  in  ignorance  they  are  often  confounded 


;| 


■  I 

ii 


MIRACLES   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 


101 


bear  the  si<2;n  manual  of  folly  and  fanaticism,  mira- 
cles, of  childish  petulance  in  the  Gospel  of  the  In- 
fancy, winking  Madonnas  of  the  middle  ages,  table- 
turning  and  spirit-rappings  in  modern  times.  It  is 
only  by  refusing  to  look  at  the  gospel  miracles  that 
the  contrast  can  be  missed.  It  is  apparent,  even  on 
slight  examination ;  and  as  it  was  with  the  character 
of  Christ,  and  as  it  was  with  the  words  of  Christ, 
so  here,  the  evidence  of  genuineness  and  heavenli- 
ness  grows  on  you  more  and  more,  the  more  you 
study  the  subject. 

And  remember  in  this  connection,  that  it  is  quite 
enough  for  tlie  purpose  to  show  that  the  great  ma- 
jority of  the  miracles  of  the  gospel  have  the  sign- 
manual  of  heaven  upon  them;  for  surely  it  need 
not  be  wondered  at,  if  among  the  many  there  should 
be  some,  the  meaning  of  which  is  not  so  readily 
apparent;  just  as  there  are  so  many  things  in  Na- 
ture, the  meaning  of  which  it  is  hard  to  see.  The 
great  majority  are  works  of  healing,  than  which 
nothing  could  have  been  more  appropriate.  And 
if  you  have  greater  difficulty  in  understanding  such 
a  miracle  as  the  multiplying  of  the  loaves  and 
fishes,  consider  how  much  light  is  thrown  upon  it 
by  the  discourse  that  immediately  follows  it.  And 
if  you  are  told,  that  it  would  have  been  much 
grander  to  have  simply  pointed  the  multitude  to 


if 


102 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


y 


I  1 


tlio  harvests  whitening  on  the  fields,  and  reminded 
tliem  of  the  small  quantity  of  seed  from  which  they 
spran/y,  as  an  evidence  of  what  great  things  God 
could  do,  remember  that  the  very  value  of  the  In- 
carnation, as  a  revelation,  was  its  bringing  into  small 
compass  the  tokens  of  the  divine  agency,  so  that  the 
connection  between  them  could  be  readily  seen;  and 
in  tlie  same  way,  the  miracle  of  the  multiplication 
of  the  loaves  was  just  the  bringing  into  small  com- 
pass and  exhibiting,  so  that  the  multitude  could 
not  fail  to  see  it,  the  very  marvel  which  the  great 
God  is  working  in  nature  every  year,  when  from  a 
few  small  seeds  He  evolves  by  natural  agencies  those 
great  harvests  which  cover  the  fields  of  autumn 
with  their  golden  robe.  The  same  considerations 
are  clearly  applicable  to  the  changing  of  the 
water  into  wine.  The  God  of  nature  was  doing  it 
every  year  in  the  vineyards  with  which  every  hill- 
side was  clothed ;  but  the  process  was  so  slow,  that 
the  dull  mind  could  not  readily  follow  it,  till  as  in 
a  picture  the  great  Kevealer  set  it  before  them. 
But  we  cannot  take  up  the  miracles  in  detail. 
Enough  to  say,  that  the  vast  majority  of  the  miracles 
of  the  gospel,  if  not  the  whole  of  them,  bear  on 
themselves  the  sign  manual  of  heaven,  and  are  evi- 
dently, both  on  literary  and  on  spiritual  grounds, 
of  a  piece  with  the  Life  and  Words;  and,  therefore, 


MIRACLKS   OF  THE   GOSPEL. 


IOC 


we  can  not  reasonably  suppose  them  to  bo  the  ex- 
crescences of  fable  pieced  on  to  tlie  confessedly 
heavenly  life  and  words.  And  then,  beside  all,  it 
is  as  certain  as  any  fact  in  history  that  Christ 
claimed  to  work  miracles;  so  that  you  have  not 
only  to  explain  the  miracles  away,  but  you  have  to 
explain  the  claim  away,  before  you  can  account  for 
the  facts  of  the  case  in  any  other  way  than  on  the 
supposition  that  the  miracles  were  actually  wrought. 

And  now  it  might  be  desirable  to  take  some 
single  miracle,  and  look  more  directly  at  the  evi- 
dence by  which  it  is  sustained.  For  this  purpose 
we  shall  take  the  Resurrection,  as  being  the  crown- 
ing miracle  of  all,  for  our  next  subject  of  study. 

Meantime,  we  are  sure  that  enough  has  been  said 
to  show,  that  it  is  certainly  not  superior  enlighten- 
ment which  condemns  Christianity  as  untrue, 
because  He  who  lived  as  never  man  lived,  and  spake 
as  never  man  spake,  is  also  said  to  have  done  the 
works  that  never  man  did. 


r 


LEOTUKE  VII. 


THE   KESURRECTION. 


So  far,  we  have  been  considering  the  miracles  of 
the  Gospel  in  a  general  way;  and  we  have  found 
that  they  come  before  ns  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
merit  a  candid  and  unprejudiced  hearing.  Wliile 
fully  admitting  the  improbability  of  isolated  mar- 
vels or  of  wonderful  stories  connected  with  names 
entitled  to  no  especial  consideration,  we  contend 
that  it  is  entirely  different  with  the  deeds  of  mercy 
attributed  to  Jesus  of  Nazareth, — that  it  is  not  only 
not  improbable,  but  in  the  highest  degree  to  be  ex- 
pected, that  such  an  One  as  He  claimed  to  be, 
especially  since  His  claim  is  so  fully  borne  out  by  the 
transcendent  excellence  of  His  character  and  unap- 
proachable wisdom  of  His  teaching,  should  exhibit 
superhuman  powers  in  action  as  well  as  in  word. 
Therefore,  we  ought  by  all  means  to  approach  the 
evidence  which  is  furnished  for  the  miracles  in  de- 
tail, without  that  overwhelming  prejudice  against  it 
which  would  be  justifiable,  if  the  person  in  whose 

(104) 


hi 


THE   KESUERECTION. 


105 


favor  it  was  adduced  was  either  a  weak  or  wicked, 
or  even  a  quite  ordinary  man.  "We  ask  no  preju- 
dice in  favor  of  the  claim;  but  we  do  think  it  is  but 
right  that  prejudice  against  it  should  be  dismissed. 
Having  time  only  to  take  up  one  of  the  miracles, 
we  ^choose  the  Eesurrection,  chiefly  because  it  is 
universally  accepted  as  the  seal  of  all  the  rest. 
Once  believe  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead  Himself, 
and  it  will  not  be  hard  to  believe  that  He  did  almost 
any  other  wonderful  thing.  "We  might,  indeed, 
conceive  of  a  person  who  was  thoroughly  convinced 
of  the  resurrection,  hesitating  or  suspending  his 
judgment  in  relation  to  one  or  two  of  the  miruoles 
recorded  in  the  Gospels, — the  cursing  of  the  fig- 
tree,  for  instance,  or  the  destruction  of  the  swine 
in  the  region  of  Gadara;  but  the  great  mass  of  the 
miracles,  the  healing  of  the  sick,  giving  sight  to 
the  blind,  hearing  to  the  deaf,  strength  to  the  pal- 
sied, and  even  life  to  the  dead,  would  seem  so  nat- 
ural on  the  part  of  One  who  was  manifestly  the 
conqueror  of  death,  as  to  present  no  diflaculty  at  all. 
Connected  with  its  importance,  there  is  another 
advantage  in  singling  out  the  resurrection.  Inas- 
much as  it  is  felt  to  be  the  citadel,  it  has  been  more 
desperately  assailed  than  any  other.  Ingenuity  has 
exhausted  itself  in  efforts  to  undermine  its  evidences; 
and  accordingly  here,  if  anywhere,  we  know  tliat 


■■■I 

if 


»\ 


i 


I 
'I 


im 


ilf 


I! 


106 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


'I  h 


ii 


the  very  worst  that  can  be  said  (against  us  has  been 
said. 

At  the  outset  we  are  confronted  with  the  unques- 
tionable fact  of  the  unanimous  testimony  of  the 
Apostles  and  early  Christians.  There  was  no  divis- 
ion among  the  Christians  in  this  regard.  They  all 
united  in  thio  testimony,  and  some  of  them  main- 
tained it  through  the  severest  persecution,  and  at 
last  sealed  it  with  their  blood.  It  may  be  well  to 
notice  at  this  stasje  the  unfair  use  that  is  sometimes 
made  of  the  doubts  which  many  of  the  disciples 
had  at  the  first.  Remarking  on  the  statement  in 
Matt,  xxviii,  17,  that  "  some  doubted,"  a  recent 
lecturer  before  the  "  Philosophical  Society  "  is  re- 
ported to  have  said :  *•  Who  and  how  many  doubted? 
What  did  they  doubt?  Why  did  they  doubt?  If 
the  chosen  disciples  doubted  what  they  saw  with 
their  own  eyes,  as  stated  by  this  writer,  may  we 
not  be  pardoned  for  doubting?"  In  answer  to  the 
question,  ''Why  did  they  doubt?"  we  have  only 
to  say,  that  it  was  because  they  were  not  the  credu- 
lous people  that  the  same  critic,  in  another  part  of 
his  lectur?,  represents  them  as  being.  They  doubted 
at  first,  as  any  reasonable  being  would,  until  he 
had  examined  the  evidence.  These  doubts  quali- 
fied them  all  the  better  for  examining  the  evidence 
thoroughly.    And  it  was  only  after  the  evidence 


THE   RESURRECTION. 


107 


was  such  as  to  overcome  all  their  doubts,  that  they 
yielded  and  believed.  Will  any  one  pretend  to  say 
that  they  continued  doubters?  All  the  disciples 
were  doubters  at  the  first.  Bat  they  were  all  con- 
vinced in  the  end.  And  the  very  fact  that  it  was 
so  hard  to  convince  them,  when  they  were  first  con- 
fronted with  so  unexpected  a  thing  as  the  Resurrec- 
tion, gives  largely  increased  value  to  their  unwaver- 
ing certainty  ever  afterwards,  through  labors,  and 
privations,  and  sufierings,  and  death  itself.  We 
have,  then,  the  unanimous  testimony  of  all  the 
Apostles  and  early  Christians,  confirmed  by  the 
knowledge  that  their  convictions  were  reached  only 
after  serious  and,  on  the  part  of  some  more  skepti- 
cal ones,  even  obstinate  doubts  and  questionings. 

Now  manifestly  these  people  either  believed  what 
they  said  or  they  did  not.  Formerly  the  infidel 
position  was  that  they  did  not,  that  they  were  a  set 
of  impostors  and  liars  who  manufactured  these 
stories,  and,  knowing  them  to  be  false,  palmed  them 
oif  upon  the  world.  But  no  intelligent  infidel  holds 
that  position  now.  It  was  found  impossible  to 
maintain  it,  and  so  it  was  abandoned.  We  need 
not,  then,  take  up  time  in  arguing  a  point  which 
is  low  so  universally  conceded.  Only  let  us 
remember  that  this  idea  of  imposture  and  false- 
hood   is  given  up  and  dismissed,  so  that  it  can- 


liV 


v\ 


Ui 


4 


i  1  i 


II 


108 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


? 


not  be  taken  np  again  as  a  refuge.  When  once 
the  idea  of  intentional  falsehood  is  dismissed,  everv- 
thing  that  is  said  on  the  one  side  or  the  other  must 
of  course  be  consistent  with  the  admitted  fact,  that 
these  men  believed  themselves  what  thej  said. 

The  hypothesis  of  fraud  being  excluded,  only  two 
distinct  suppositions  remain, — viz.:  reality  and 
imagination.  If  not  a  fraud,  the  Resurrection  must 
have  been  either  a  fact  or  a  fancy.  We  are  trying, 
if  we  can,  to  get  away  from  the  fact  of  it.  Let  us, 
then,  try  whether  fancy  will  account  for  it.  Could 
it  have  been  a  hallucination? 

To  test  this  snpposition,  consider,  iirst,  how  many 
must  have  been  under  the  same  hallucination.  One 
person  may  think  he  sees  something,  while  what  he 
sees  is  only  in  his  imagination.  But  is  it  usual  to 
find  two  persons  whose  halhicinations  shall  so  ex- 
actly correspond  that  their  testimony  will  agree  as 
to  what  they  saw?  Did  you  ever  hear  of  twelve 
persons  that  were  so  deceived  by  their  senses  all  at 
the  same  time  and  exactly  in  the  same  manner? 
And  yet  there  must  have  been  far  more  than  tweh^e 
so  deluded,  for  there  were  the  women  besides,  and 
the  other  disciples,  of  whom  there  were  120  in  Jeru- 
salem, to  say  nothing  of  the  500  (probably  of  the 
Galilean  disciples)  to  whom  the  Apostle  Paul  re- 
fers in  his  letter  to  the  Corinthians.      ^        •    ■ 


THE   RESURRECTION. 


109 


Consider  next  what  sort  of  people  tliey  were. 
We  have  the  writings  of  some  of  them,  and  we 
have  such  information  about  others  as  gives  us  some 
insight  into  their  character.  Eead  Matthew's  Gos- 
pel, and  see  if  you  think  him  a  visionary  kind  of 
man.  Study  the  characters  of  Peter,  James,  John, 
and  Thomas^  and  see  if  you  think  them  just  the 
kind  of  people  to  surrender  themselves  to  a  foolish 
delusion. 

Consider  next  in  what  state  of  mind  they  were. 
Were  they  expecting  a  resurrection?  Not  one  of 
them.  Even  the  faithful  women  did  not  expect  it. 
And  as  for  the  Twelve,  they  had  all  forsaken  Him 
and  fled  when  He  was  crucified,  and  when  they  talk- 
ed to  one  another  about  Him,  it  was  in  this  wise: 
"  We  trusted  that  it  had  been  He  that  should  have 
redeemed  Israel,  but" — (He  is  dead  and  buried,  and 
it  is  all  over.)  Evidently  not  one  of  them  was  in 
a  state  of  mind  favorable  to  hallucination. 

Consider,  finally,  what  must  have  been  the  extent 
of  the  hallucination,  and  you  will  find  that  it  would 
be  almost  incredible  that  even  a  single  person,  how- 
ever visionary  and  however  wrought  up  with  ex- 
pectation, should  be  the  subject  of  it.  For  it  was 
not  only  a  single  sight  of  Him,  or  a  single  inter- 
view. There  was  repeated  intercourse  for  the  space 
of  forty  days.    During  that  time  every  conceivable 


•SI 


m 


110 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


confirmation  was  given.  They  saw  Ilim,  tliej 
heard  Ilim,  they  touched  Him,  they  walked  with 
Him,  they  talked  with  Him,  they  ate  with  Him, 
they  reported  and  recorded  the  very  words  He  said ; 
and  these  words  are  just  as  much  marked  by 
heavenly  wisdom  and  grace  as  His  recorded  words 
before  His  death.  Can  you  conceive  of  any  fuller 
evidence  that  could  have  been  given  of  the  fact  of 
His  resurrection  ? 

Remember  here,  that  it  will  not  do  to  say  we  have 
only  their  own  statements  for  all  this,  for  that  is 
to  take  refuge  in  the  exploded  supposition  of  fraud. 
It  is  a  very  common  thing  for  an  infidel  to  give  up 
a  supposition  like  this  when  argued  out  of  it,  and 
then  quietly  resort  to  it  again,  when  pr  .cjsed  in 
another  quarter.  Consider,  then,  I  say,  not  only 
the  number  of  persons,  and  the  kind  of  persons,  and 
the  state  of  mind  in  which  they  were  at  the  time, 
but  the  extraordinary  extent  of  the  hallucination, 
and  then  say,  if  it  does  not  require  tenfold  more 
credulity  to  believe  in  the  theory  of  hallucination 
than  in  the  fact  of  the  resurrection.  If  we  had  had 
only  the  testimony  of  Mary,  we  might  have  sup- 
posed it  was  only  the  gardener  after  all.  Or,  if  a 
few  of  them  had  only  professed  to  have  seen  Him 
once,  there  might  have  been  room  for  mistake.  But 
when  they  not  only  saw  Him,  but  conversed  with 


THE   EESURRECTION. 


Ill 


hd 
re 


til 


Him,  and  ate  with  Him,  and  verified  His  identity 
when  doubts  came  over  them,  the  conviction  grows 
upon  you,  that  tliey  could  not  possibly  have  been 
all  mistaken  every  time — in  the  upper  chamber,  on 
the  road,  at  the  table,  by  the  side  of  the  lake,  in 
broad  daylight — for  the  space  of  forty  days.  The 
more  you  examine,  the  more  you  will  see  how  vain 
it  is  to  attempt  to  explain  the  facts  of  the  case  by 
hallucination. 

Does  this  conclude  the  case  for  the  Eesurrection  ? 
It  could  not  have  been  fraud;  it  could  not  have  been 
fancv;  must  it  not  then  have  been  fact?  It  would 
seem  so.  And  yet,  in  all  fairness,  it  must  be  con- 
ceded that  modern  infidelity  does  not  allow  these 
three  to  include  all  supposable  cases.  A  fourth 
alternative  has  been  devised,  which  is  neither  fraud, 
nor  fact,  nor  fancy;  but  a  mixture  of  fact  and  fancy, 
with  perhaps  a  little  grain  of  fraud  in  it  to  help  its 
plausibility.  We  refer  to  the  mj'thical  theory. 
"We  have  already  seen  reasons  for  rejecting  it,  as 
applied  to  the  miracles  in  general.  But  it  may  be 
well  also  to  consider  how  it  applies  to  the  resurrec- 
tion in  particular. 

Let  us  first  get  a  clear  conception  of  how  it  dif- 
fers from  the  disproved  theories  of  fraud  and  of 
fancy.  The  idea  is  this,  that  those  who  were  con- 
versant with  the  original  facts,  without  any  inten- 


\ 


.1 


it 


r;  ■ 


n 


l'\ 


HI 


\ 


M 


n 


! 


r 


112 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


tion  of  deceiving,  simply  exaggenited  them  a  little, 
ti8  enthusiastic  disciples  are  likely  to  do.  And 
when  the  story  came  to  be  told  to  the  next  genera- 
tion, it  would  be  considerably  larger  than  it 
was  at  first;  and  so  on,  and  on,  till  in  a  perfectly 
natural  way,  without  any  intentional  fraud,  but 
simply  by  the  process  of  quite  natural  development, 
all  the  wonders  of  the  resurrection  story  came 
to  the  front.  Now,  it  is  true  that  wonderful  stories 
have  developed  in  thi«  way  in  the  early  agos  of  the 
world,  especially  in  the  infancy  of  nations,  and  in 
prehistoric  times.  Every  one  knows,  of  course, 
that  the  Jewish  nation  was  not  by  any  means  in  its 
infancy,  that  the  times  were  not  prehistoric,  and 
that  the  conditions  in  general  were  not  favorable  to 
the  growth  of  myths,  least  of  all  of  such  a  myth  as 
the  resurrection,  seeing  that  one  of  the  two  great 
parties  who  alternately  held  the  reins  of  power  (the 
Sadducees,  I  mean)  had  as  a  principal  part  of  their 
"platform"  the  denial  of  any  resurrection,  and 
would,  of  course,  see  to  it  that  any  such  myth  in 
the  process  of  formation  was  promptly  exploded. 
But  leaving  these  considerations,  and  many  others, 
let  me  simply  call  j^our  attention  to  one  circum- 
stance which  renders  the  mythical  explanation  of 
the  resurrection  story  incredible,  which  absolutely 
proves  that  it  did  not  grow  up  by  gradual  accre- 


I  I 


THE   RESURRECTION. 


113 


tions,  from  generation  to  generation,  but  was 
firmly  believed  and  fully  taught  by  Christian 
teachers  while  many  of  the  original  witnesses 
were  still  living.  When  first  the  mythical  the- 
ory was  propounded,  the  attempt  was  made  to 
push  the  Gospels  far  down  into  the  second  century, 
so  as  to  leave  considerable  number  of  intervening 
generations,  and  afford  time  for  the  myths  to 
grow.  These  attempts  have  failed.  But,  even 
apart  from  the  question  as  to  the  precise  date  of  the 
Gospels,  we  have  conclusive  proof  that  the  fact  of 
the  resurrection  was  believed,  and  asserted,  and  in- 
corporated into  the  Christian  doctrine,  while  3'^et 
many  of  the  original  witnesses  were  still  alive.  The 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  is  one,  the  genuine- 
ness and  antiquity  of  which  even  the  most  de- 
structive of  the  literary  critics  of  Germany  have  not 
been  able  to  doubt.  It  is  as  certain  as  anything  of 
the  kind  could  be  that  Paul  was  the  author  of  it, 
and  that  it  was  written  at  no  longer  interval  from 
the  death  of  Christ  than  twenty  to  twenty-five  years. 
Now,  with  the  knowledge  of  this  fact,  read  the  fif- 
teenth chapter  of  the  Epistle, — that  magnificent 
passage  which  is  so  familiar  to  our  ears  in  the 
funeral  services  of  all  the  churches.  Now,  we  know 
that  John  was  living  at  that  time,  and  others  of  the 
original  witnesses.  In  fact  the  Apostle  himself  as- 
8 


;]i 


;.'.? 


n 


i 


f!l 


VI 


i 

ll 


114 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


■ 


I 


• 


Berts  that  the  greater  part  of  them  were  living  still. 
Does  no^  this  utterly  explode  the  mythical  theory 
BO  far  as  the  resurrection  is  concerned?  If  the 
original  witnesses  were  still  alive,  how  was  it 
possible  for  such  an  extraordinary  story  to 
have  grown  up  in  the  gradual  and  imperceptible 
way  which  the  mythical  theory  supposes?  Is  it  not 
evident  that  the  very  existence  of  such  a  story  un- 
contradicted, while  several  of  the  original  witnesses 
were  still  alive  and  in  frequent  communication  with 
BO  prominent  a  teacher  of  it  as  the  Apostle  Paul, 
proves  that  we  must  dismiss  this  mythical  idea 
which  so  conveniently  mixes  fact  and  fancy,  as 
another  of  the  many  vain  attempts  to  explain  away 
the  evidence  of  the  Eesurrection?  We  might  have 
made  the  case  a  great  deal  stronger  by  taking  the 
evidence  which  the  "Acts  of  the  Apostles"  fur- 
nishes, that  the  Resurrection  was  the  main  substance 
of  apostolic  teaching  from  the  day  of  Pentecost  on- 
ward, but  we  preferred  to  take  the  epistle  for  the 
reason  above  given,  that  the  most  destructive  of  the 
critics  have  not  been  able  to  cast  the  slightest  doubt 
on  its  antiquity  or  genuineness,  while  they  have 
labored  hard,  though  we  believe  qnite  unsuccess- 
fully, to  do  this  for  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

We  thus  find  that  the  story  of  the  resurrection 
cannot  be  resolred  into  frauds  nor   into  fancy^  nor 


11 


THE   RESURRECTION. 


115 


into  that  ingenious  mixture  of  the  different  ele- 
ments which  enter  into  the  mythical  theory.  What 
else,  then,  can  it  bo  but  fact  ? 

But  are  there  not  difficulties  on  this  supposition, 
too  ?  It  is  alleged  that  there  are.  There  is,  first 
and  mainly,  the  improbability  of  the  thing.  This 
we  have  dealt  with  already,  and  wo  have  one  word 
more  to  say  about  it  before  we  are  done.  The  other 
is,  the  alleged  discrepancies  in  the  statements  of  the 
different  witnesses.  It  is  quite  evident  that  there 
is  not  time  to  go  into  these  in  detail.  SuflSce  it  to 
say,  that  they  are  just  such  variations  as  are  always 
expected  when  independent  witnesses  give  separate 
accounts,  without  any  attempt  to  bring  them  into 
verbal  harmony.  Each  of  the  witnesses  gi  ^^es  a  very 
brief  account  of  the  occurrences  of  forty  days,  and, 
of  course,  one  leaves  out  what  another  puts  in, 
one  mentions  a  circumstance  that  struck  him, 
another  refers  to  quite  different  particulars  that 
impressed  themselves  on  his  mind,  and  so  on.  But 
in  no  case  has  any  clear  contradiction  been  estab- 
lished. 

Perhaps  the  most  satisfactory  way  of  dealing  with 
this  matter  in  a  sentence,  is  to  refer  to  the  fact, 
which  many  may  not  know,  that  the  highest  auth- 
ority on  evidence,  perhaps,  that  ever  lived,  has 
thoroughly  sifted  this  evidence  on  the  same  prin* 


ir 


:i 


■  ' 


If 

';r 


116 


TUE   FOUNDATIONS. 


•I 


=,«l 

m! 


I) 


ciples  as  are  applied  in  courts  of  law,  and  come  to 
the  decided  conclusion  that  it  is  impossible  by  any 
justiiiable  process  of  legal  criticism  to  invalidate 
these  testimonies.  I  refer  to  Greenleaf's  work, 
entitled  "The  Testimony  of  the  Evangelists  Exam- 
ined by  the  Kules  of  Evidence  Administered  in 
Courts  of  Justice."  Now,  this  is  no  other  than  the 
famous  Greenleaf,  whose  work  on  Evidence  has  been 
a  standard  ever  since  it  was  issued,  not  only  in 
America,  but  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic. 
The  London  Law  Journal^  referring  toGreenleafs 
work,  says  :  "  Upon  the  existing  law  of  evidence 
more  light  has  shone  from  the  New  World  than 
from  all  the  lawyers  who  adorn  the  courts  of 
Europe."  And  the  North  American  Beview 
spoke  of  him  before  his  death  as  "  an  able  and  pro- 
found lawyer, — a  man  who  has  grown  grey  in  the 
halls  of  justice  and  the  schools  of  jurisprudence, — 
a  writer  of  the  highest  authority  on  legal  subjects, 
whose  life  has  been  spent  in  weighing  testimony 
and  sifting  evidence,  and  whose  published  opinions 
on  the  rules  of  evidence  are  received  as  authori- 
tative in  all  the  English  and  American  tribunals." 
It  is  doubtful,  in  fact,  if  there  ever  lived  a  man 
better  qualified  for  sifting  evidence.  Well,  this 
man  bent  his  energies  to  the  sifting  of  the  testi- 
mony of  the  evangelists  all  through  the  Gospels, 


THE   RESURRECTION. 


117 


and  especially  their  testimony  in  relation  to  the 
trial  and  death  and  resurrection  of  JesuA,  and  the 
result  will  appear  from  the  following  quotation  : 
"  Let  the  witnesses,"  he  says,  "  bo  compared  with 
themselves,  with  each  other,  and  with  surrounding 
facts  and  circumstances  ;  and  let  their  testimony 
be  sifted  as  if  it  were  given  in  a  court  of  justice  on 
the  side  of  the  adverse  party,  the  witnesses  being 
subjected  to  a  rigorous  cross  examination.  The  re- 
sult, it  is  confidently  believed,  will  be  an  undoubt- 
ing  conviction  of  their  integrity,  ability,  and  truth. 
In  the  course  of  such  an  examination  the  undesign- 
ed coincidences  will  multiply  upon  us  at  every  step 
in  our  progress;  the  probability  of  the  veracity  of 
the  witnesses  and  of  the  reality  of  the  occurrences 
which  they  relate  will  increase  until  it  acquires,  for 
all  practical  purposes,  the  value  and  force  of  demon- 
stration." 

The  more  you  examine  it  fairly,  the  more  you  will 
be  convinced  that  the  evidence  is  so  overwhelming 
that  you  cannot  get  away  from  it  without  the  most 
desperate  expedients.  When,  in  the  olden  time, 
a  far-off  claimant  for  a  throne  would  make  good  his 
illegal  pretensions,  he  must  wade  through  seas  of 
blood  to  it,  he  must  put  to  death  the  heir  apparent 
and  the  heir  presumptive,  and  as  many  others  as 
lay  between  him  and  the  coveted  possessiouk    Simiw 


!! 


t.;' 


%' 


iff 


'■A 


% 
m 


118 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


I     !^ 


"i  ■ 


It. 


lar  is  the  task  which  modern  infidelity  has  to  per- 
form before  it  can  erect  its  usurping  throne  on  the 
empty  grave  of  Jesus.  It  must  make  havoc  of  all 
the  four  Gospels,  reducing  them  mainly  to  a  tissue 
of  lies.  It  must  destroy  the  historic  credibility  of 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  must  get  rid  in  some 
fashion  of  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  It 
must  make  havoc  of  every  scrap  of  writing  that  re- 
mains from  the  first  century,  which  refers  to  the 
Resurrection.  It  must  despoil  the  character  of 
Matthew  and  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  Paul  and 
Peter.  It  must  crucify  again  the  Lord  Himself, 
for  again  and  again  while  He  was  alive  He  said 
that  He  would  rise  again.  It  must  dispose  even 
of  Christianity  itself,  with  its  fifty-two  commem- 
orations of  the  Resurrection  every  ./ear,  and  show 
how  it  was  possible  that  such  an  institution  was 
founded  on  a  lie.  It  must,  in  fact,  murder  history, 
and  murder  character,  and  murder  truth.  And 
why?  All  because  the  great  nineteenth  century  is 
supposed  to  have  settled  unalterably  that  it  is  a 
thing  incredible  that  God  should  raise  the  dead. 
But  may  we  not,  with  all  due  respect  even  to  so 
great  an  abstraction  as  the  nineteenth  century, 
ask  again  the  old  question:  "Why  should  it  be 
thought  a  thing  iiicredible  that  God  should  raise 
the  dead?"    What  a  wonderful  resurrection  does 


(  I' 


THE   KESURRECTION. 


119 


He  work  every  year  in  those  very  weeks  that  en- 
circle the  glad  Easter  dayl  He  makes  the  dead 
trees  and  dead  flowers  to  live  again,  and  shall  it  be 
said  that  He  cannot  raise  to  life  a  dead  man  ?  True 
it  is  that  we  do  not  see  men  raised  from  the  dead 
nowadays;  but  neither  do  we  see  men  lijke  Jesus 
the  Christ  nowadays.  If  he  had  been  only  an  ordi- 
nary man,  it  would  have  seemed  well-nigh  incredi- 
ble that  God  should  rais^  him  from  tlie  dead. 
But  He  was  no  ordinary  man.  And  when  you  think 
what  sort  of  a  man  He  was,  the  probability  is  shift- 
ed to  the  other  side.  It  was  not  a  mere  miracle. 
When  profoundly  looked  at,  it  was  no  marvel  at  all. 
The  Apostle  Peter  puts  it  in  the  right  light  in  his 
first  sermon  after  Pentecost:  "Whom  God  hath 
raised  up,  having  loosed  the  bands  of  death,  because 
it  was  not  possible  that  he  should  be  holden  of  it." 
O  my  friends,  if  we  would  only  acquaint  ourselves 
with  Jesus  Christ;  if  we  would  drink  in  His  words; 
if  we  would  enter  into  sympathy  with  the  plan  and 
purpose  and  tenor  of  His  life,  if  we  would  gaze  on 
the  beauty  of  His  face  and  fill  our  hearts  with  the 
admiration  which  is  due  to  the  immortal  loveliness 
of  His  character;  if  we  would  get  really  and  truly 
acquainted  with  Him,  instead  of  thinking  it  a  thing 
incredible  that  God  should  raise  Him  from  the 
dead, — we  should  think  it  a  thing  incredible  that 


:!i; 


m 


it 

tr 


si" 


!l 


!$ 


n\ 


■4 


Hi 


If-  -, 


ill 


ii- 


120 


THE   FOTTNDATIONS. 


God  slioiild  not  do  it.  We  should  enter  into  the 
true  and  deep  philosophy  of  the  Apostle  when  he 
said,  "  God  raised  Him,  because  it  was  not  possible 
that  such  an  one  as  He  should  be  holden  of  death." 
"Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,"  who  has  not  mocked  us  with  a  myth 
when  our  beloved  dead  lie  cold  and  beautiful  be- 
neath our  anguished  gaze,  but,  "  who,  according  to 
His  abundant  mercy,  hath  begotten  us  again  unto  a 
lively  hope  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from 
the  dead,  to  an  inheritance  incorruptible  and  unde- 
filed,  and  that  fadeth  not  away." 


:    * 


THIRD  PART. 


THE  COMPLETED  FOUNDATION, 
Soil  in  (tf)Kl»t,  i«»lre  Itnoton  ts 


'4i 


I 


'1 


/ 


LECTUEE    VIII. 


REVELATION  BY  THE  SPIRIT. 

Our  feet  are  now  firmly  planted  on  "  the  Eock  of 
Ages,"  wliicli  rests  securely  on  the  great  nnderlyin^^ 
rock-system  of  the  Divine  Existence.  We  may 
thankfully  accept,  as  a  firm  foundf^tion  on  which  to 
build,  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ,  now  fully  certi- 
fied to  us.  We  have  seen,  first,  that  it  was  in  the 
highest  degree  probable  that  such  a  revelation  as  was 
suited  to  our  wants  should  be  given ;  next,  that  the 
best  conceivable  medium  for  giving  it  was  a  human 
life,  and  finally  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
claimed  to  bring  just  such  a  revelation,  gave  every 
credential  of  his  claim  that  a  reasonable  man  could 
desire,  exhibiting  superhuman  excellence  of  charac- 
ter, superhuman  wisdom,  and  superhuman  power, 
and  that,  to  crown  all,  the  seal  of  God  was  put 
upon  the  earthly  life  of  this  "  Holy  One  of  Israel," 
by  His  resurrection  from  the  dead.  Thus  is  fully 
justified  the  claim  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  to  be  the 
Christ  of  God,  the  Savior  of  the  world. 

(123) 


■I 
•I 


'•i » 


i: 


5*- 


■.. 


IJ.  5 


124 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


),    ! 


Let  us  pause  a  moment  at  this  point,  and  see  how 
far  we  have  reached  without  the  sh'ghtest  use  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  and,  in 
fact,  without  using  even  as  common  history  any 
other  books  than  the  four  Gospels,  and  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  We  have  already  a 
sufficient  basis  for  belief  of  the  Gospel,  belief, 
that  is,  of  the  great  fact,  that  "God  so  loved 
the  world  that  He  gave  His  only  begotten  Son," 
that  "God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world 
unto  Himself."  There  is  much  of  vast  importance 
which  we  have  not  reached  yet,  and  even  something 
essential  to  the  gospel  in  its  application  to  human- 
ity at  large,  as  we  shall  presently  see;  but  the  great 
facts  of  the  gospel,  historically  considered,  are  fixed 
on  a  sure  basis  before  we  make  any  use  of  the  Bible 
as  such,  and  before  we  even  open  the  Old  Testament 
at  all.  And  yet  there  are  those  who  will  try  to 
make  everything  stand  or  fall,  with  our  ability  to 
verify  the  accuracy  of  some  difficult  or  obscure  pas- 
sage or  passages  in  some  of  the  many  books  of  the 
Old  Testament — books  that  have  come  down  to  us 
from  such  hoar  antiquity  that  it  seems  almost  a  mir- 
acle we  have  them  at  all!  ^ 

Eemembering,  then,  how  much  is  made  sure  be- 
fore we  enter  upon  its  consideration,  let  us  pass  to 
the  third  part  of  our  general  subject.    It  is  the 


REVELATION   BY   THE   SPIRIT. 


125 


revelation  of  God  in  Christ  hy  the  Holy  Spirit. 
And  first  let  us  see  the  necessity  for  it. 

Let  us  here  recall  what  has  been  said  (Lect.  TV)  as 
to  the  necessary  conditions  of  God's  revealing  Him- 
self to  man.  We  found  self-limitation  to  be  one  of 
them.  And  accordingly,  while  a  human  life  was 
unquestionably  the  best  conceivable  medium  of  a 
divine  revelation,  it  of  necessity  involved  limita- 
tions— such  limitations  in  particular  as  are  im- 
posed by  space  and  time.  The  revelation  must  be 
given  within  a  limited  time  in  the  world's  history, 
and  within  a  limited  space  on  the  world's  surface. 
There  are  those  who  have  made  this  a  ground  of 
objection  to  Christianity;  but  a  moment's  thought 
would  have  shown  them,  that  these  limitations  of 
which  they  complain  were  necessities  arising  from 
the  nature  of  the  case. 

But  while  these  limitations  were  unavoidable 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  we  might  reasonably 
inquire  whether  there  might  not  be  any  way  of 
overcoming  the  disadvantage  arising  from  them,  so 
that  those,  who  had  no  opportunity  of  holding  per- 
sonal intercourse  with  the  Christ  of  God,  might 
have  their  wants  provided  for.  And  to  such  an  in- 
quiry there  is  a  perfectly  satisfactory  answer. 
"While  the^  man  Christ  Jesus  in  His  earthly  life 
was  subject  to  the  usual  limitations  of  humanity, 


■M 


ill 


i 


1^' 


m; 


I 


^^1 


11  i  I 


U' 


?  j 


;     ■?  ' 


\     ( 


IIIH 


126 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


in  time  and  space,  the  Divine  Spirit  in  communion 
with  whom  He  lived,  in  whose  name  He  spoke, 
and  by  whose  power  He  did  His  wonderful  works 
of  love  and  mercy,  was  not  so  limited ;  and  herein 
lies  the  possibility  of  such  an  extension  of  the  rev- 
elation as  is  suitable  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  whole 
race.  "We  do  not  here  profess  to  enter  into  the  dif- 
ficult subject  of  the  Trinity,  or  to  state,  far  less  ex- 
plain, the  interior  nature  of  the  Deity.  Let  trans-, 
cendental  theology  deal  with  that  subject  if  it  can; 
but  it  does  not  belong  to  the  humbler  and  much 
easier  department  of  the  Christian  evidences.  And 
accordingly  we  here  go  no  further  than  the  safe 
statement,  that  in  the  freedom  of  the  divine  Spirit 
from  the  human  limitations  which  attached  to  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,  lies  the  possibility  of  such  an  ex- 
tension of  the  revelation  as  shall  meet  the  wants  of 
the  whole  world. 

So  much  for  possibility;  let  us  now  inquire  what 
the  probabilities  of  the  case  may  be.  There  is  one 
quite  simple  and  natural  way  in  which  the  benefits 
of  the  revelation,  given  in  the  life  of  the  man  Christ 
Jesus,  might  have  been  extended  beyond  the  time 
and  the  country  to  which  He  belonged.  I  refer  to 
the  method  of  publication  through  the  ordinary 
channels.  The  extension  of  His  influence  beyond 
the  sphere  of  His  life  might  have  been  left  entirely, 


EEVELATION   BY   THE  SPIRIT. 


127 


as  in  the  case  of  ordinary  men,  to  the  spontaneous 
efforts  of  those  who  thought  His  life  and  sayings 
worth  preserving.  "Well,  suppose  for  a  moment  wo 
had  nothing  more  than  this;  that  this  was  all  that 
could  be  said  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts  and  Epistles, 
that  they  were  tha  honest  attempts  of  men  who 
had  been  powerfully  influenced,  by  the  life  and 
words  of  Jesus,  to  give  the  benefit  of  them  to  the 
world.  Would  that  prove  that  these  books  were 
of  little  or  no  value?  Consider  what  good  oppor- 
tunity we  should  have,  even  in  that  case,  of  becom- 
ing truly  and  savingly  acquainted  with  the  Lord 
Jesus.  "We  have,  first,  four  biographies  of  Him, 
written  by  men  who  had  exceptionally  good  oppor- 
tunities of  becoming  acquainted  with  the  facts  of 
the  case.  "We  have  a  large  number  of  His  sayings 
and  discourses,  evidently  recorded  and  preserved 
with  the  greatest  care.  We  have  an  account  of  the 
infiuence  which  His  life  and  teachings  had  upon 
such  men  as  Peter,  John,  and  Paul.  And  we  have 
the  teachings  of  those  men  when  they  attempted  to 
set  forth,  each  in  his  own  way  and  from  his  own 
point  of  view,  the  doctrines  of  their  Master.  Is  all 
this  of  little  value?  We  contend  not  onlv  that 
it  is  of  unspeakable  value,  but  that  it  is  enough  to 
give  a  solid  basis  for  a  truly  Christian  faith  and  life. 
There  would,  indeed,  be  serious  disadvantages, 


M 


i;i 


m 


rT; 


Pi 


!     ■ 


I 


I 
,    I 


128 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


and  in  particular  this:  that  those  who  take  this  po- 
sition could  never  certainly  know  how  much  the 
original  teaching  of  the  Lord  Himself  had  been 
colored  by  the  views  of  His  reporters.  But  though 
such  persons  could  never  take  an  isolated  state- 
ment as  absolute  proof  of  anything,  and  must  ever 
be  more  or  less  in  the  dark  as  to  the  whole  amount 
of  the  divine  teaching,  yet  if  they  are  honest  (and 
we  are  presuming  them  to  be  so),  they  may  receive 
and  believe  enough  to  give  them  perfect  confidence 
in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  a  divine  teacher  and 
Savior.  I  say  they  may,  not  that  they  will.  The 
tendency  of  what  are  called  loose  views  of  inspiration 
is  in  the  direction  of  neglect  and  general  unbelief 
and  indifference;  but  this  is  not  a  necessary  ten- 
dency. We  believe  not  only  that  there  may  be, 
but  that  there  are,  not  a  few  who  do  not  believe  in 
plenary  inspiration,  and  yet  have  a  more  living  and 
earnest  faith  in  Christ — the  Christ  of  the  Gospels, 
the  Acts,  the  Epistles  and  Eevelation — and  a  great- 
er devotion  to  Him  and  to  His  cause,  than  a  large 
number  of  people  who  are  quite  orthodox  in  their 
belief.  Far  be  it  from  us,  then,  to  denounce  as  in- 
fidels those  who  are  hindered  by  difficulties  from 
accepting  what  we  may  regard  as  the  truth  on  the 
subject  of  aspiration,  so  long  as  they  receive  the 
testimony  of  the  evangelists  and  apostles  bo  far  as 


REVELATION   BY   THE  SPIRIT. 


129 


to  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  do  their 
best  to  follow  in  the  way  which  lie  points  out  to 
them  as  the  way  of  life.  And  for  the  same  reason 
we  ought  not  to  allow  the  genuine  infidel,  or  the 
unwise  and  nnscriptural  apologist,  to  treat  the 
claims  of  Christ  and  of  Ciiristianity  as  identical 
with  the  question  of  the  literal  and  verbal  infalli- 
bility of  all  the  books  which  are  bound  together  in 
covers,  on  which  the  name  "  Holy  Bible,"  however 
appropriately,  is  inscribed. 

But,  while  we  admit  that  Christianity  can  well 
stand  its  ground  and  maintain  its  claim  on  the  alle- 
giance of  men,  apart  from  the  doctrine  of  special 
inspiration,  we  do  not  believe  that  the  publication 
of  the  glad  tidings  to  the  world  has  been  left  in 
this  loose  and  uncertain  way.  We  believe  it  to  be 
extremely  probable  that  our  Father  God,  who  gave 
the  revelation  of  Himself  in  the  human  life  of  Je- 
sus of  Nazareth,  would  use  some  means  to  make 
that  revelation  widely  known,  without  the  danger 
of  mistake  which  must  necessarily  attach  to  all  or- 
dinary means  of  publication ;  and  further,  that  He 
would  take  into  consideration  the  case  of  those 
whom  the  ordinary  channels  of  publication  could 
not  reach,  those  who  lived  before  the  Son  of  God 
came  to  earth,  and  those  who,  by  reason  of  distance 
or  for  any  other  cause,  were  not  reached  by  the  or- 
9 


i'U 


130 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


dinary  channels.  Take  this  in  connection  with 
what  has  been  advanced  before,  and  we  reach  the 
probability  that  use  would  be  made  of  the  a<^ency 
of  the  omnipresent  and  eternal  Spirit,  to  make  the 
revelation  known  beyond  the  narrow  bounds  in 
w^hich,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  it  had  to  be 
given. 

And  now,  when  we  turn  to  the  life  and  words  of 
Jesus  as  ^iven  by  the  evangelists,  we  find  that  lie 
speaks  again  and  again  of  this  very  agency  in  mak- 
ing known  the  revelation  which  was  given  through 
Himself.  The  passages  are  so  numerous  that  wo 
can  only  refer  to  one  or  two  as  specimens.  Speak- 
ing of  the  work  of  the  '*  Spirit  of  truth"  after  He 
Himself  should  have  left  the  world,  He  says  (John 
xvi,  14):  "  He  shall  glorify  Me,  for  He  shall  receive 
of  Mine  and  shall  show  it  ur/'^  you;"  and  again 
He  says,  after  His  death  and  resurrection  (Acts  i, 
8):  "Ye  shall  receive  power,  after  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  come  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  witnesses 
unto  Me."  And  not  only  does  He  refer  to  the 
Spirit's  witness  after  His  departure  from  the  world, 
but  again  and  again  He  refers  to  His  testimony  in 
the  earlier  ages  of  the  world  before  His  advent,  as 
where  we  are  told  (Luke  xxiv,  27):  "Beginning  at 
Moses  and  all  the  prophets,  He  expounded  unto 
them  in  all  the  scriptures  the  things  concerning 
Himself" 


REVELATION   BY   THE   SPIRIT. 


131 


with 
I  the 
;ency 
e  the 
ds  in 
to  be 

els  of 
it  lie 
mak- 
rough 
at  wo 
>peak- 
3r  He 
(John 
eceive 
again 
\ct8  i, 
Holy 
nesses 
to  the 
world, 
[)iiy  in 
jnt,  as 
ing  at 
i  unto 
erning 


"We  have,  then,  the  authority  of  tlio  Lord  Him- 
self for  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  apostles  of  the  New.  Hitherto 
we  liave  been  restricting  ourselves  to  the  claim  of 
Christ  Himself  to  speak  in  the  name  of  God.  But 
now, you  observe,  that  claim  is  enlarged,  so  i^  to 
take  in  the  prophets  and  apostles  in  a  certain  sense. 
In  a  certain  sense,  we  say,  because  no  one  will  claim 
that  apostles  and  prophets  stood  in  precisely  the 
same  relation  either  to  God  or  to  man,  as  Cln'ist 
Himself  did.  He  was  the  revealer  of  the  Father 
and  Savior  of  the  world.  They  occupied  a  much 
liumbler  position — viz.,  that  of  witnesses  to  Him 
and  to  His  truth.  But  the  claim  is  now  advanced 
for  them  that  they  were  inspired  witnesses,  so  that 
when  we  listen  to  them  we  are  listening  not  to  ordi- 
nary men,  but  to  ambassadors  of  God. 

It  would  now  be  in  order  to  examine  this  claim. 
To  do  it  thoroughly  would  be  manifestly  a  vain  at- 
tempt in  so  brief  a  course  as  this  must  be. 

Suffice  it  only  to  say  that,  for  the  prophets  of  the 
Old  Testament,  we  have  as  guarantees  of  their  in- 
spiration— first,  their  own  credentials,  to  be  deter- 
mined by  examining  each  separately,'^  and  next,  the 

*It  should  never  be  forgotten  that  the  claim  of  Christ  to  be  the  reveal- 
er of  God  and  Saviour  of  the  world  is  not  involved  in  this  question  of 
details.  It  is  true  that  He  affixes  His  seal  to  the  testimony  of  the  apos- 
tles and  prophets,  especially  con.ceriiing  Himself;  but  He  nowhere  de- 


>1 
t  1 


;  I 

■'I. . 


132 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


t  J 


seal  of  Christ  Himself,  in  the  references  wliich  He 
makes  to  them.  And  for  the  apostles  of  tlie  "New 
Testament,  we  have  as  guarantees — first,  tlie  prom- 
ise of  special  guidance,  which  Christ  made  to  them 
before  His  death,  and  next,  the  evidence  which  we 
have  at  Pentecost,  and  from  their  subsequent  lives 

fines  the  nat  ire  or  extent  of  their  inspiration.  He  nowhere  speaks  of 
them  as  qualified  to  teach  science,  or  called  to  reveal  scientific  truth, 
unknown  and  undiscovered  in  their  day.  He  never  even  claims,  on 
their  behalf,  that  tliey  were  so  raised  by  their  inspiration  above  the  rest 
of  mankind,  as  to  be  quite  free  from  popular  errors  and  misconceptions 
on  subjects  which  do  not  form  part  of  the  moral  and  spiritual  revela- 
tion  they  were  commissioned  to  unfold.  There  is  one  passage  which 
looks  a  little  like  this,  where  Christ  says:  "He  will  guide  you  into  all 
truth  ;"  but  when  we  look  at  the  original  Greek,  we  find  that  It  is  not 
eU  truth,  but  "  all  the  truth,"  i.  e.  the  truth  in  regard  to  things  moral 
and  spiritual;  specially,  as  the  context  clearly  shows,  the  truth  in  regard 
to  Himself.  While,  then,  we  do  expect  from  those  who  were  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God  authoritative  declarations  on  everything 
that  pertains  to  "the  great  salvation,"  we  do  not  expect  them  to  throw 
in  here  some  information  on  astronomy,  there  some  anticipation  of  geo- 
logical discovery,  again  to  propound  some  advanced  theories  on  politics 
and  government,  and  further  on  to  show  how  to  divide  the  electric  light 
and  how  to  construct  the  phonograph  and  telephone !  When  you  keep 
this  in  view  you  will  see  that  a  great  many  of  the  current  objections  of 
the  day,  which  are  supposed  to  lie  against  Christianity,  are  really  only 
objections  to  certain  theories  of  inspiration.  Take  the  so-calied  "  Mis- 
takes of  Moses,"  for  instance.  I  am  one  of  those  who  believe  that  it  is 
not  Moses  but  his  critics  who  are  mistaken.  But  what  if  Moses  were 
proved  to  have  made  some  mistakes  ?  What  if  he  were  proved  to  be 
xT.istaken  in  his  geological  views?  Would  the  fact,  that  he  knew  no 
more  of  science  than  the  learning  of  the  Egyptian!?  could  give  him, 
militate  against  his  claim  to  be  a  prophet  of  God  ?  Who  ever  said  that 
one  of  the  necessary  credentials  of  a  prophet  of  the  Lord  was  omnis- 
cience? I  can  not  find  any  such  claim  in  the  words  of  Christ,  or  indeed 
in  any  part  of  the  Bible.  How  absurd,  then,  is  it  to  make  the  claims  of 
Christ  to  be  the  revealer  of  the  Father  turn  on  the  question  whether 
Moses  knew  all  about  geology  ?  • 


REVELATION   BY   THE  SPIRIT. 


133 


:h  He 
New 
)rom- 
them 
3I1  we 
.  lives 

teaks  of 
c  truth, 
lims,  on 
the  rest 
2eptions 
revela- 
!  which 
into  all 
it  is  not 
:s  moral 
a  regard 
ader  the 
srything 
to  throw 
1  of  geo- 
politics 
;ric  light 
ou  keep 
itions  of 
lily  only 
5d  "  Mis- 
that  it  is 
ses  were 
ed  to  be 
knew  no 
ve  him, 
said  that 
s  omnis- 
r  indeed 
ilaims  of 
whether 


and  teachings,  that  the  promise  was  fulfilled.  This 
double  guarantee  ought  surely  to  afford  us  sufficient 
confidence  in  the  teaching  of  these  men  on  all  sub- 
jects which  come  within  the  range  of  their  high 
commission. 

Thus,  you  see,  the  revelations  which  came  from 
the  Spirit  of  God  through  the  prophets,  not  only 
prepared  the  way  for  the  coming  of  Christ,  in  tlie 
fulness  of  time,  but  provided  for  the  spiritual  wants 
of  those  who  lived  in  the  early  ages  of  the  world ; 
and  the  unfoldings  of  divine  truth,  which  the 
apostles  have  furnished,  come  to  us  with  the  guar- 
antee that  what  they  taught  was  not  their  own  un- 
aided conception  of  that  gospel  which  their  Master 
had  preached,  but  such  views  of  it  as  were  the  re- 
sult of  the  guidance  of  that  heavenly  Instructor, 
whom  their  Master  promised  to  send  from  the 
Father,  to  guide  them  into  all  the  truth.  Thus  was 
guaranteed,  to  all  who  should  come  after,  a  certain- 
ty concerning  these  all-important  matters,  which 
could  not  have  been  enjoyed,  if  the  promulgation 
of  the  truth  had  been  left  entirely  to  the  ordinary 
channek  of  publication. 

The  question  still  remains,  of  course,  as  to  what 
guarantee  we  have  that  these  scriptures  in  our  hands 
faithfully  represent  the  teachings,  first,  of  Christ 
Himself,  and  then,  of  the  prophets  and  apostles 


J  3  J: 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


whose  qualifications  He  guarantees  to  us.  The 
consideration  of  this  question  will  come  under  the 
next  head — viz.:  The  Scriptures  of  the  Oil  and 
New  Testaments. 

Meantime  let  me  only  notice,  in  conclusion,  that 
this  doctrine  of  the  Spirit's  agency  has  an  applica- 
tion beyond  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets  and 
apostles.  The  Spirit  of  God  and  of  Christ  is  rep- 
resented, as  not  only  inspiring  prophets  and  apos- 
tles, but  as  dealing  with  all  men,  and  ready  to 
guide  all  who  are  ready  to  accept  His  guidance. 
Thus  a  way  is  provided  by  which  even  those  may 
be  reached  who  never  had  the  opportunity  of  hear- 
ing the  testimony  of  prophets  and  apostles,  or  of 
those  who  learned  the  vnxj  of  life  through  them.  It 
is  true  that  the  testimony  of  those  who  have  them- 
selves received  the  truth  is  the  great  means  which 
God  has  appointed  for  the  salvation  of  the  world, 
and  accordingly  the  disciples  of  Christ  are  enjoined 
to  "  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to 
every  creature."  But,  while  these  are  the  appointed 
means,  we  know  that  God  can  reach  the  hearts  of 
men  independently  of  appointed  means;  and  thus, 
while  firmly  holding  that  the  gospel  is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation,  we  can  at  the  same  time 
hold  fast  the  assurance  that  "  God  is  no  respecter 
of  persons,  but  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth  Him 


..-^ 


REVELATION    BY   THE   SPIRIT. 


135 


I 


that 


and  worketh  rigliteoiisness  is  accepted  with  Him." 
(Acts  X,  34,  35).  God  can  "  fulfil  Himself  in  many 
ways."  Tliough  limitation  was  necessary  in  order 
to  manifest  Himself  in  the  flesh,  all  limitations  are 
transcended  in  the  revelation  by  the  Spirit.  As 
human,  Christ  was  limited  and  circumscribed;  but 
as  divine,  no  pent-up  ^Nazareth  or  Palestine  con- 
fined His  powers.  And  of  this  He  was  fully  con- 
scious, even  in  His  earthly  life.  Looking  back  to 
the  past,  He  said:  "Before  Abraham  was,  I  am." 
Looking  forward  to  the  future,  He  gave  the  j)romise: 
"  Lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world."  And,  casting  His  eye  outward  to  tlie  far- 
thest limits  of  the  earth's  population,  He  made  the 
marvelous  declaration:  "Wherever  two  or  three 
are  gathered  together  in  My  name,  there  am  I  in 
the  midst  of  them." 

Well,  then,  may  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles 
say,  and  well  may  his  words  go  out  to  the  utter- 
most ends  of  the  earth:  "Now,  therefore,  ye  (Gen- 
tile nations)  are  no  more  strangers  and  foreigners, 
but  fellow-citizens  with  the  saints,  and  of  the  house- 
hold of  God;  and  are  built  upon  the  foundation  of 
the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himbclf  be- 
ing the  chief  corner-stone,  in  whom  all  the  building, 
fitly  framed  together,  groweth  unto  a  holy  temple 
in  the  Lord,  in  whom  ye  also  are  builded  together 
for  a  habitation  of  God  through  the  Spirit." 


il' 


r-       ■ 

I      ,;     . 


LECTURE  IX. 


THE  SIXTY-SIX  BOOKS. 


We  have  seen  that,  not  only  did  the  Lord  Jesus 
give  the  most  satisfactory  credentials  of  His  exalted 
mission,  but  that  the  prophets  wlio  preceded  Him 
and  the  apostles  who  followed  Him  had  His  guar- 
antee, in  addition  to  any  credentials  of  their  own,  for 
the  accuracy  and  authority  of  their  teaching  of 
"  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus."  And  now  we  have  to 
consider  the  question,  as  to  what  means  we  have  of 
access  to  the  teaching  of  these  apostles  and  prophets 
and  of  Christ  Himself,  and  what  guarantee  we  have, 
that  what  has  come  down  to  us  is  indeed  the  very 
truth  which  they  taught  when  they  were  here  on 
earth.  The  answer  to  this  question  will  bring  us  at 
last  to  what  so  many  unfortunately  are  inclined  to 
take  first,  viz.:  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  an  inspired 
record  of  the  revelation  which  God  has  given  to 
man. 

And  here  we  have  first  to  deal  with  the  extraor- 
dinary perversity  and  unfairness,  so  common  in  our 

(136) 


J      .1 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   LOOKS. 


137 


day,  of  treating  the  scriptures  as  if  the  whole  mass 
were  only  one  book.  Of  all  the  unfair  devices  for 
weakening  the  evidences  of  Christianity  this  is  per- 
haps the  very  worst.  And  the  strangest  thing 
about  it  is,  that  so  many  good  Christians  allow  it 
and  even  insist  upon  it.  So  great  is  the  mischief 
arising  from  this  that  it  would  almost  seem  a  pity, 
that,  even  for  convenience'  sake,  the  sixty-six  books 
were  so  constantly  bound  together  in  one  volume. 
For  not  only  is  there  the  unhaj^py  result  of  reduc- 
ing tlie  many  witnesses  to  one,  in  the  minds  of  un- 
thinking people,  but  even  of  silencing  and  put- 
ting out  of  court  that  one.  For  such  unreasoning 
suspicion  is  abroad  about  the  Bible,  that  there  are 
multitudes  of  people,  and  even  some  good  Chris- 
tian people,  who  would  attach  a  great  deal  more 
importance  to  the  statement  of  almost  any  author 
outside  the  Bible,  than  of  any  number  of  authors 
inside  of  it.  Show  them  a  fact  attested  by  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  Paul  and  Peter,  and  they 
Mill  say:  "O  that  is  all  in  the  Bible;  give  us  some- 
thing outside  of  the  Bible  and  we  will  believe  it." 
The  Bible,  in  the  first  place,  stands  to  them  for  a 
single  author;  and  in  the  second  place  for  a  preju- 
diced author,  one  who  has  his  own  cause  to  bolster 
up;  and  accordingly  a  hundred  confirmations  within 
its  covers  are  not  so  good  as  one  from  the  outside 


; .:  h 


/ 


>\u 


I 

11 


!   ift! 


ii;:  : 


■-'      ! 


^ 


138 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


would  be.  Is  it  not  unreasonable  in  the  extreme? 
Let  me  suppose  a  case,  in  order  to  put  the  mon- 
strous injustice  in  a  clear  light.  SupjDOse  that,  very 
soon  after  the  invention  of  printing,  some  enterpris- 
ing publisher  had  collected  all  the  original  mate- 
rials of  any  value  in  regard  to  the  history  of  the  Ro- 
man republic  and  bound  them  together  into  one 
volume,  which  he  issued  to  the  world  under  the 
title  of  "  The  History  of  the  Roman  Republic;"  and 
suppose  further  that  it  became  so  popular,  that  it 
was  circulated  first  by  hundreds,  then  by  thousands, 
then  by  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  finally  by  the 
million,  so  that  it  came  into  almost  everybody's 
hands.  But  in  course  of  time,  after  all  the  world 
had  become  so  accustomed  to  it  in  its  form  of  a 
single  volume,  there  sprang  up  a  fashion  of  skepti- 
cism on  the  whole  subject,  and  everything  in  the 
volume  was  regarded  with  suspicion;  and  accord- 
ingly the  whole  history  of  the  Roman  republic  was 
called  into  question.  Those  who  believed  it  called 
attention  to  the  manv  difierent  authorities  who  cor- 
roborated  each  other.  "  Here  is  Livv,  who  writes 
about  it  in  Latin.  Here  is  Dio  Cassius,  who  writes 
about  the  same  thing  in  Greek.  Here  are  speeches 
of  Cicero  that  relate  to  the  same  events.  And  here  are 
poems  of  Horace  that  could  not  have  been  written 
unless  these  facts  were  so."    But  they  were  imme- 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


139 


Ko- 


diately  put  down,  by  triumphantly  pointing  out  that 
all  these  diiferent  authorities  were  no  authorities  at 
all.  Why  not?  Because  that  publisher  and  that 
bookbinder  of  the  fifteenth  century  had  published 
and  bound  them  up  together!  That  of  course  set- 
tled the  question.  In  the  first  place  it  disposed  of 
all  the  separate  witnesses,  of  Li^^y,  and  Dio,  and 
Cicero,  and  all  the  rest;  for  were  they  not  all  bound 
together  in  the  same  volume?  And  in  the  second 
place  it  disposed  even  of  the  single  witness  of  the 
bound  book,  because  it  was  the  credibilitv  of  the 
book  itself,  which  w^as  in  question,  and,  therefore, 
all  that  was  in  the  book  must  be  ruled  out  as  the 
testimony  of  an  interested  party.  And  so  it  came 
to  pass  that,  from  the  single  unfortunate  circum- 
stance of  the  scattered  materials  having  been  con- 
sidered by  this  publisher  to  be  worth  collecting  and 
publishing  together,  the  evidence  for  the  history  of 
the  Roman  republic  was  actually  wiped  out  of  ex- 
istence. It  is  to  be  hoped  that  what  may  remain  of 
the  archives  of  the  first  century  of  American  history 
may  never  be  bound  up  in  one  volume,  however 
large,  or  perhaps  the  people  of  the  great  future,  the 
twenty-ninth  century,  for  example,  may  not  believe 
we  ever  had  any  history  at  all ! 

Let  us  then  by  all  means  remember,  when  we  are 
dealing  with  the  subject  of  the  Scriptures,  that  we  are 


'■ . 


; 


1  '  1 " 


M 


'■A 


hi! 
hit 


I; 


i  ! 


I      ' 

;       'i    ■ 
!       il" 


140 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


dealing,  not  with  one  book,  but  with  sixty-six;  not 
with  a  single  volume,  but  with  a  library.  Kemem- 
ber,  further,  that  these  sixty-six  books  are  not  links, 
but  strands  of  evidence.  There  is,  indeed,  a  golden 
chain  of  sacred  history  from  Genesis  to  Kevelation, 
so  that,  in  a  historical  point  of  view,  many  of  the 
books  of  the  Bible  are  links.  But,  so  fa  ?.a  the  evi- 
dences of  Christianity  are  concerned,  they  are  not 
links  but  strr  nds.  This  can  be  proved  in  a  mo- 
ment. The  strength  of  a  chain  is  the  strength  of 
its  weakest  link;  and  if  a  single  link  be  gone,  the 
^ whole  is  useless.  !N"ow  will  any  one  pretend  to  say 
that,  if  it  were  proved  that  the  book  of  Esther  had 
no  divine  authority,  we  should  have  to  give  up  the 
gospel  of  Matthew?  Would  there  be  no  evidence 
for  the  divine  authority  of  Christ  if  the  Lamenta- 
tions of  Jeremiah  had  happened  to  have  been  lost? 
Why,  there  would  be  enough  to  establish  the  divine 
authority  of  Christ  if  we  had  nothing  more  than 
the  four  evangelists,  as  we  have  already  shown;  and 
whatever  of  confirmation  or  elucidation  comes  from 
the  sixty- two  other  books  is  just  so  much  in  ad- 
dition. The  Bible  is  not  a  chain  of  sixty-six  links; 
it  is  a  cable  of  sixty-six  strands;  and  if  there  is  such 
strength  as  we  have  found  in  four  of  them,  what 
shall  we  say  of  the  united  strength  of  all  the  sixty- 
six? 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


141 


After  delivering  the  lecture  on  the  "Miracles  of 
the  Gospel,"  I  had  a  courteous,  though  anonymous, 
letter,  ridiculing  the  story  related  in  the  book  of 
Daniel,  of  the  three  Hebrew  youths  in  the  fiery  fur- 
nace, and  asking  how  I  could  believe  any  of  the 
miracles  of  Christ,  seeing  they  rested  on  precisely 
the  same  ground,  i.  e.  the  same  ground  historically, 
for  vou  will  remember  that  no  use  whatever  was 
made  of  tlio  doctrine  of  inspiration.  The  letter  was 
evidently  that  of  an  intelligent  man,  and  it  was  ap- 
parently the  production  of  a  fair-minded  man.  And 
yet  he  said  that  the  miracle  of  the  fiery  furnace  re- 
corded in  Daniel,  and  that  of  the  healing  of  the 
leper  recorded  by  Matthew,  were  on  the  same 
ground,  though  the  authors  that  speak  of  the  one 
and  of  the  other  were  six  hundred  years  apart  ! 
Think  of  it !  If  it  had  not  happened  that  Daniel  and 
Matthew  had  been  bound  together  in  ©ne  volume 
for  so  long  a  time,  it  would  never  have  occurred  to 
this  good  man  to  say  such  a  thing.  Kemember,  we 
do  not  meai  to  say  that  a  very  good  case  could  not 
be  made  out  for  the  miraculous  rescue  of  the  three 
Hebrew  captives,  if  that  were  before  us;  but  to  say 
that  our  ability  to  prove,  as  a  matter  of  history,  that 
the  Lord  Jesus  healed  a  leper  with  a  word,  or  fed 
live  thousand  people  with  a  few  loaves,  depends  on 
our  ability  to  prove  the  reality  of  a  rescue  reported 


' 


. 


I' 


il 


i  U 


M    i 


i  i  J 


1^  it" 


ij  r  ♦ 


142 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


six    hundred   years    before,  is   certainly  very  re- 
markable logic. 

We  do  not  deny,  indeed,  that  in  a  very  important 
sense  the  Scriptures  form  one  book,  but  only  on  the 
supposition  of  their  divine  origin.  He  who  ques- 
tions their  divine  authority  has  no  right  to  deal 
with  them  as  one  book.  The  very  thing  the  skeptic 
sets  out  to  disprove  is  the  unity  of  authorship.  He 
wishes  to  prove  that  it  is  only  human,  and  this  he 
cannot  possibly  do,  if  he  holds  on  to  the  unity  of 
authorship,  for  no  one  in  his  senses  can  believe  that 
all  these  books  were  the  production  of  one  man. 
(How  many  centuries  would  such  a  man  have  had 
to  live?)  Suppose,  for  example,  my  critic,  just  re- 
ferred to,  should  undertake  to  prove  that  the  miracle 
in  Daniel,  and  that  in  Matthew,  are  on  the  same 
ground;  how  could  he  doit?  He  could  only  do  it 
by  showing  that  both  were  by  the  same  author, 
which  is  the  very  thing  that  he  denies,  and  which 
he  must  deny  to  sustain  his  position ;  for  if  they 
were  both  by  the  same  author,  that  author  must 
have  been  God,  and  therefore,  both  of  them  true. 
The  spiritual  unity  of  the  sixty-six  books  will  come 
before  us  in  due  time  and  in  its  proper  place;  but, 
unless  we  would  beg  the  whole  question,  we  must 
start  with  the  human  authorship  in  its  multiplicity, 
and  see  whether  we  can,  by  legitimate  means,  reach 


THE   SIXTY-SIX    BOOKS. 


143 


tlie  divine  autliorsliip  in  its  unity.  Meantime  what 
we  have  to  do,  is  to  see  whether  these  numerous 
hooks,  which  are  bound  together  into  one  volume 
{\nd  called  the  Bible,  really  come  to  us  with  the  pu- 
thority  of  those  prophets  and  apostlos  v/ho  .«  ..e 
saw  in  our.last  lecture)  were  divinely  commissioned 
and  inspired  to  teach  men  the  way  of  salvation. 

Now,  inasmuch  as  we  cannot  in  a  single  lecture 
take  up  all  the  sixty-six  books  and  examine  them 
in  detail,  to  find  out  whether  each  of  them  comes 
with  apostolic  or  with  prophetic  authority,  we  shall 
have  to  content  ourselves  with  indicating,  in  a  gen- 
eral way,  the  nature  of  the  evidence.  And,  first,  we 
shall  look  at  the  twenty- seven  books  which  make 
up  the  New  Testament.  It  is  a  common  idea  that 
the  authority  of  these  twenty-seven  books  rests  up- 
on the  decree  of  some  council  as  far  down  as  the 
fourth  or  fifth  centur}".  At  all  events,  this  idea  is 
industriously  circulated  on  the  part  of  those  opposed 
to  Christianity;  but  1  have  yet  to  find  the  first 
Christian  author,  among  the  Protestant  churches, 
at  least,  who  puts  it  on  this  ground.  The  author- 
ity on  which  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  are 
accepted  is  the  authority  of  the  apostles;  and  the 
authority  of  the  apostles  (as  we  have  seen)  rests  up- 
on the  authority  of  Christ.  Tliis  makes  the  ques- 
tion a  simple  one  concerning  those  books  which 


fl"! 
hi 


|.  i;  ' 


U4: 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


were  the  work  of  the  apostles  themselves;  as  the 
gospels  of  Matthew  and  John,  and  the  epistles  of 
Paul  and  Peter.  It  becomes,  in  the  case  of  these, 
simply  a  question  of  their  genuineness.  As  to  the 
other  books,  as  the  gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke,  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  anonymous  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  (which  may,  however,  have  been 
written  by  Paul)  there  is  good  evidence  that  they 
were  all  sanctioned  by  the  apostles,  if  not  produced 
under  their  superintendence.  Tlu  apostolic  author- 
ity of  the  books  which  afterwar  1  were  bound  to- 
gether as  the  New  Testament,  was  carefully  guarded 
from  the  very  earliest  times,  long  before  the  first 
council  met.  Much  has  been  made  of  the  fact  that 
there  were  disputes  as  to  the  authority  of  certain 
books;  but  this  only  shows  that  the  claim  to  apos- 
tolic authority  was  not  received  without  good  evi- 
dence. And  these  disputes  in  the  early  history  of 
the  church  were  only  in  reference  to  five  of  the 
shortest  and  least  important  epistles.  From  the 
beginning,  twenty-two  books  were  allowed  by  all 
to  be  certainly  of  apostolic  authority;  and  though 
afterward  there  was  some  debate  about  the  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  on  account  of  its  being  anonymous, 
and  the  book  of  Revelation  on  the  supposition  that 
it  might  have  been  some  other  John  than  the 
apostle  of  that  name  who  wrote  it,  the  very  debate 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


145 


about  these  books  had  tlie  effect  of  brhiffinnr  out 
Buch  a  mass  of  evidence  in  favor  of  their  apostolic 
authority,  that  tlie  question  was  set  finally  at  rest. 
And  thus,  after  careful  examination  and  sifting,  the 
conclusion  was  reached  that  the  twenty-seven  books, 
now  bound  together  as  the  New  Testament,  had 
the  sanction  of  the  apostles,  and  therefore  ultimately 
of  Christ  Himself. 

But  then  we  have  not  the  original  manuscripts. 
Certainly  not;  no  more  than  we  have  of  Yirgil,  or 
Juvenal,  or  Senecn,  or  any  of  those  who  WTote  in 
these  times.  What  evidence,  then,  have  we  that 
our  copies  are  correct?  The  very  same  kind  of  evi- 
dence that  we  have  in  the  case  of  the  classical 
authors,  only  ten-fold  stronger — for  this  reason,  that 
the  number  of  copies  is  so  very  much  greater.  We 
do  not  pretend  that  there  was  any  infallibility  in 
the  copyists.  But,  on  the  whole,  the  copies  must 
have  been  wonderfully  correct;  because  among  such 
a  multitude  there  is  so  much  agreement,  and  the 
differences  are  in  such  little  things.  Suppose  that 
\^ou  had  fifty  to  one  hundred  fairly  good  copies  of 
some  document,  could  you  not  very  easily  make 
sure  of  a  correct  copy?  Even  though  each  one  of 
the  fifty  made  mistakes,  they  would  not  all  make 
the  same  mistakes.  If,  for  example,  you  found  that 
one  of  them  left  out  a  word,  v/hile  the  othier  fOrty- 
10 


146 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


iil:^' 


i0\  '■ 


nine  put  it  in,  you  would  have  no  doubt  whatever 
that  it  ought  to  go  in.  On  the  other  hand,  if  one 
inserted  a  sentence  which  the  other  forty-nine  left 
out,  you  would  be  inclined  to  think  that  sen- 
tence did  not  belong  to  the  original  document. 
And  it  is  evident,  that  just  in  proportion  to  the 
number  and  independence  of  the  different  copies 
would  be  the  certainty  that,  after  comparing  them 
wisely  together,  you  had  a  correct  reproduction  of 
the  original. 

"When,  more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  years 
ago,  it  was  first  made  known  to  the  world  that  the 
manuscript  copies  of  the  Scriptures  did  not  agree  in 
every  letter  and  word,  there  was  a  feeling  of  alarm 
throusch  all  Christendom,  and  the  infidels  of  the 
time  loudly  proclaimed  that  the  end  had  come,  and 
very  soon  the  last  would  be  heard  of  the  Christians' 
Bible.  It  was  all  corrupt,  they  said,  and  there  was 
no  guarantee  that  the  manuscripts  remaining  were 
at  all  the  same  as  the  apostolic  originals.  Then 
followed  the  tremendous  labor  of  comparing  the 
manuscripts.  "  Thirteen  to  fifteen  hundred  Greek 
manuscripts"  (I  quote  from  Gaussen),  "  sought  out 
from  all  the  libraries  of  Europe  and  Asia,  were 
carefully  compared  with  one  another,  word  by 
word,  letter  by  letter,  by  modern  criticism,  and 
compared,  too,  with  all  the  ancient  versions,  Latin, 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


147 


Armenian,  Syriac,  Sahidic,  Coptic,  Etliiopic,  Arabic, 
Sclavonian,  Gothic,  and  Persian,  ind  with  all  the 
quotations  made  from  the  New  Testament  bj  the 
ancient  fathers  in  their  innumerable  writings." 
And  with  what  result?  Tlie  firm  establishment  of 
a  genuine  text,  so  that  still,  "  over  all  the  w^orld 
you  will  see  all  the  sects  of  Christians,  even  the 
most  opposite,  give  us  the  same  Greek  Testament, 
without  the  various  readings  having  been  able  to 
form  among  them  t\vo  distinct  schools."  Thus  the 
very  criticism  which  was  expected  utterly  to  de- 
molish the  text  of  the  l^ew  Testament  scriptures 
has  established  it  upon  an  immovable  basis.  There 
are,  as  was  to  be  expected,  a  few  doubtful  passages; 
but  these  are  so  few  and  of  such  slight  importance, 
that  they  really  do  not  affect  our  assurance  as  to 
the  genuine  apostolic  teaching.  If  every  doubtful 
passage  should  be  left  out,  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus 
would  be  just  the  same  as  it  was  before.  And  thus 
it  has  come  to  pass  that  after  this  verbal  and  criti- 
cal comparison  h2,s  said  its  last  word,  we  have  assu- 
rance made  doubly  sure.  "We  have,  then,  the  very 
best  reasons  for  accepting  as  authoritative  and  gen- 
uine all  the  twenty-seven  books  of  the  IN'ew  Testa- 
ment. 

And  then,  besides  all,  the  internal  evidence  cor- 
roborates the  external.     Compare  the  four  apostolic 


^  f 


1'  ■ 


148 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


1. 1'l 


gospels  witli  similar  productions  that  were  issued 
without  apostolic  sanction,  and  what  a  difference! 
The  merest  tyro  in  literary  criticism  can  see  it  at 
once.  And  so,  too,  when  you  compare  the  epistles 
of  Paul  with  those  of  Clement,  for  instance.  Though 
it  is  evident  that  Clement  is  a  good  man,  he  falls  so 
far  short  in  originality  and  strength  of  all  the  scrip- 
ture writers,  that  you  recognize  him  at  once  as  an 
ordinary  man.  Let  any  one,  of  even  moderate  in- 
telligence, compare  the  books  of  the  Kew  Testa- 
ment with  the  private  productions  of  even  the  best 
of  men  in  the  infancy  of  the  church,  and  he  will 
readily  see  the  clear  line  of  demarcation  which  sep- 
arates that  which  is  apostolic  from  that  which  is 
private. 

The  evidence  for  the  prophetic  authority  of  the 
thirty-nine  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  so  nearly 
the  same,  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  >jo  over  the 
ground.  There  is,  of  course,  the  disadvantage  of 
the  greater  antiquity  of  the  books,  which  is,  how- 
ever, to  a  large  extent  counterbalanced  by  the  scru- 
pulous and  even  superstitious  care  which  was  taken 
by  all  the  Hebrew  copyists,  and  the  marvelous 
unanimity  of  the  most  opposite  sects  and  parties 
among  the  Jews  in  regard  to  the  text  of  the  Scrip- 
tures; and,  on  the  otier  hand,  there  is  the  sanction 
which  Christ  Himself  and  His  apostles  gave  by 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


149 


frequent  quotation,  and  bj  the  unvarying  habit  of 
referring  to  those  Scriptures  as  the  oracles  of  God. 
The  result  of  the  whole  is,  to  use  the  words  of  one 
who  has  made  the  transmission  of  ancient  books 
to  modern  times  a  special  study  (Isaac  Taylor),  the 
Scriptures  have  come  down  to  us  "with  an  evidence 
of  their  genuineness  and  integrity  ten-fold  more 
various,  copious,  and  conclusive  than  can  be  ad- 
duced in  support  of  any  other  ancient  writing." 
And  thus,  without  any  use  of  any  decree  of  any 
council,  is  satisfactorily  answered  the  question,  as  to 
what  means  we  have  of  access  to  the  teachinors  of 
the  apostles  and  of  Christ  Himself,  and  what  guar- 
antee we  have  that-  what  has  come  down  to  us  is 
indeed  the  very  truth  which  they  taught  when  here 
on  earth. 

]^ow  would  be  the  time  for  discussing  the  nature 
and  degree  of  that  inspiration  which  those  prophets 
and  apostles  enjoyed,  on  whom  the  authority  of  the 
sixtv-six  books  of  the  Old  and  'New  Testaments  rests. 
The  importance  of  the  question  can  not  be  denied. 
But  we  hold  that  it  has  been  very  much  exaggerated, 
and  that  much  mischief  has  been  done  by  pressing 
particular  theories  of  inspiration,  and  insisting  upon 
making  Christ  and  Christianity  responsible  for 
them.  How  muny,  for  example,  have  been  led,  by 
popular  representations  of  inspiration,  to  regard  the 


i 
■I 


t 


. 


ft' t 


I 


M 


.>'i  nt 


III! 

if  '  . 

:r 


'■'t 


150 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


prophets  and  apostles  as  mere  machines,  mere 
amanuenses,  mere  pens  in  the  hand  of  God;  where- 
as it  is  quite  evident  that,  whatever  the  nature  and 
degree  of  divine  influence  may  have  been,  it  did 
not  destroy  their  individuality  or  reduce  their  mani- 
fold witness.  We  have  already  seen  how  unscriptu- 
ral  it  is  to  suppose  that  apostles  and  prophets  must 
have  been  omniscient  because  they  were  inspired. 
It  would  seem,  however,  that  any  view  of  inspira- 
tion was  practically  worthless,  which  admits  of 
errors  in  setting  forth  the  very  facts  and  truths 
which  they  were  commissioned  to  make  known. 
For  how  then  should  we  be  able  to  distinguish  that 
which  comes  to  us  with  divine  authority  from  that 
which  was  only  a  matter  of  opinion  ? 

On  the  other  hand,  we  do  not  think  it  necessary 
or  wise  to  insist  on  infallibility  in  regard  to  all 
subjects  incidentally  touched.  Who  would  think, 
for  example,  that  it  would  have  been  suitable  to 
have  departed  from  current  modes  of  thought  and 
speech,  in  reference  to  the  stability  of  the  earth,  so 
as  to  bring  the  words  into  agreement  with  the  astro- 
nomic reality  of  the  case?  We  do  not  think  it 
necessary  even  yet  to  do  so,  and  we  yery  properly 
set  down  as  pedantic  those  who  try  it.  How  much 
more  pedantic  and  absurd  would  it  have  been,  when 
all  the  world  was  ignorant  of  the  true  facts  of  the 
case. 


THE   SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


151 


Take  the  language  used  about  creation  as  an  ex- 
ample. We  take  it  because  it  is  more  criticised  and 
objected  to  than  anything  else  in  the  scriptures. 
Kow,  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  necessary  to 
give  men  some  idea  of  the  divine  agency  in  all  the 
wide  domain  of  creation,  there  were  three  suppos- 
able  ways  in  which  it  might  have  been  done.  First, 
all  wrong  scientific  notions  might  have  been  cor- 
rected. This  would  have  necessitated  a  long  treat- 
ise on  astronomy,  another  on  geology,  another  on 
natural  history,  with  perhaps  a  lengthy  chapter 
on  evolution,  long  before  the  world  was  prepared 
for  anything  of  the  kind.  This  is  what  many  of 
the  scientific  objectors  of  tlie  day  seem  to  think 
there  ought  to  have  been;  but  is  it  not  absurd? 

Or  again,  the  truth  might  have  been  taught  con- 
cerning God's  relation  to  the  different  parts  of  crea- 
tion, in  such  a  way  as  to  conform  to  the  ordinary 
notions  which  were  current  at  the  time,  the  object 
being,  not  to  correct  the  science  of  the  period, 
but  to  set  men  right  on  the  religious  aspects  of  the 
case.  This  is  the  view  taken  by  many,  and  we  do 
not  think  it  especially  objectionable.  A  moment's 
thought  will  show  that  it  would  have  been  a  much 
more  reasonable  and  less  pedantic  course  than  the 
other,  which  so  many  unthinking  people  suppose 
ought  to  have  been  taken. 


i  : 


152 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


m  '\  ^!i 


But  there  is  a  third  way;  and  we  think  that  some- 
wiiere  in  this  direction  lies  the  true  account  of 
the  matter.  The  language  may  have  been  chosen, 
so  as  to  conflict  neither  with  the  ideas  then  preva- 
lent, nor  with  the  actual  verities  of  the  case.  The 
result  would  be,  that  the  people  who  lived  during 
the  fifty-live  centuries,  more  or  less,  before  Coper- 
nicus, would  have  some  chance  to  understand  it, 
though  of  course  they  would  understand  it  in  con- 
formity with  their  own  ideas  on  scientific  subjects; 
that  is  to  say,  tliey  would  get  true  religious  ideas 
from  it,  but  their  scientific  notions  would  remain 
unchanged.  Tn  such  a  case,  however,  when  the 
scientific  truth  w^as  at  last  discovered,  there  would 
at  first  be  an  impression,  that  the  Bible  was  on  the 
side  of  the  old  ideas;  but,  on  close  examination,  it 
would  be  found  that,  while  nothiiig  had  been  said  to 
disturb  the  minds  of  men  when  there  was  no  occasion 
for  it,,  and  only  harm  could  result  from  it,  the 
langTiage  used  was  really  such  as  to  be  in  harmony 
with  the  actual  facts  of  the  case. 

This  view  of  the  case  I  am  disposed  to  take, 
not  because  I  think  the  second  a  dangerous  or 
unworthy  view,  but  because  I  can  not  otherwise  ac- 
count for  the  many  wonderful  harmonies  with  sci- 
ence, which  careful  investigation  has  brought  out. 
Let  any  one  read  tlie  works  of  such  eminent  scien- 


f 


some- 
unt  of 
ihosen, 
preva- 
The 
during 
Coper- 
md  it, 
n  con- 
bjects; 
J  ideas 
'emain 
Bn  the 
would 
on  the 
tion,  it 
said  to 
3casion 
it,  the 
,rmonv 

D  take, 
•oiis  or 
nse  ac- 
ith  sci- 
ht  out. 
t  scien- 


THE  SIXTY-SIX   BOOKS. 


153 


tific  men  as  Dawson  or  Dana,  which  bring  out  the 
wonderful  harmonies  of  that  old  record  with  mod- 
ern science,  and  he  will  see  reason  for  believing 
that,  however  little  the  original  author  of  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis  may  have  known  of  science,  he 
was  so  guided  by  some  heavenly  inspiration  as  to 
''build  better  than  he  knew."  This  illustration 
may  serve  to  show,  that  the  relation  of  inspiration 
to  the  science  of  the  time,  when  the  different  scrip- 
tures were  produced,  may  well  be  left  an  open  ques- 
tion, so  long  as  the  plenary  view  is  held  in  relation 
to  the  great  subjects  and  objects  of  revelation,  as  set 
forth  in  that  passage  of  scripture  which  is  more 
explicit  than  any  other  on  the  subject:  "Tlie  holy 
scriptures  are  able  to  malve  thee  wise  unto  salva- 
tion, through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  All 
scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is 
profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction, 
for  instruction  in  righteousness:  that  the  man  of 
God  may  be  perfect,  thoroughly  furnished" — not 
unto  all  scientific    disquisitions — but    "unto  all 


good  works. 


j> 


1 


LECTUEE    X. 


THE  ONE  BOOK. 


In  dealing  with  ths  scrij  ,nres  as  ordinary  pro- 
ductions, so  as  to  ascertain  their  vahie  and  credibil- 
ity, historically  considered,  we  have  seen  that  it  is 
unfair  to  treat  them  as  if  the  whole  formed  only 
one  book.  Hemember  that  there  is  no  question  as 
to  the  human  authorship.  A.nd  so  long  as  we  are 
dealing  with  these  books  as  the  productions  of  hu- 
man authors,  it  is  manifestly  unjust  to  disregard 
the  confluence  of  testimony  from  so  many  different 
points.  But,  while  we  never  dream  of  denying  the 
human  authorship,  we  maintain  that  this  is  not 
the  whole  account  of  the  matter,  that  there  is  a  di- 
vine element  running  through  them  all,  and  that, 
therefore,  the  boards  of  the  book  binder  are  not  the 
only  bond  which  binds  these  different  books  to- 
gether into  unity.  The  multiplicity  of  the  books 
is  a  patfjnt  fact,  which  every  one  can  see  who  has 
only  common  sense  enough  not  to  confound  together 

(154) 


THE   ONE   BOOlC. 


155 


authorship  and  Look-binding,  and  which  would 
never  be  forgotten,  if  it  were  not  convenient  some- 
times to  do  so,  in  order  to  weaken  the  historical  basis 
of  Christianity.  But  the  unity  of  the  books  is  some- 
thing which  lies  deeper,  and  which  requires  some 
power  of  appreciating  spiritual  and  divine  things  to 
recognize;  but  when  once  it  is  recognized,  it  adds  so 
immensely  to  the  strength  of  the  historical  argument 
as  to  give  perfect  repose  to  tho&e  who  are  fai,  \y 
brought  face  to  face  with  it.  "VVe  can  as  usual  only 
indicate  in  briefest  outline  the  nature  of  the  evi- 
dence, which  ic  so  copious,  that  almost  every  page 
of  the  Bible  is  lighted  up  with  it,  for  those  who 
have  eyes  to  see. 

Keeping  in  mind  the  evidence  we  have  from  his- 
tory that  these  scriptures  now  in  our  hands  have 
come  to  us  with  the  aut^ority  of  the  prophets  and 
apostles,  guaranteed  by  Christ  Himself,  it  is  now  in 
order  to  look  into  them,  and  see  if  their  contents  cor- 
respond with  what  we  should  expect  of  writings  so 
highly  authenticated.  You  will  see  that  we  are  now 
in  the  same  attitude  in  which  we  found  ourselves 
in  dealing  with  the  second  part  of  our  whole  argu- 
ment, After  satisfying  ourselves  that  the  claim 
was  distinctly  made,  on  behalf  of  Jesus  of  ]!^aza- 
reth,  that  He  was  the  Messiah  sent  to  reveal  the 
Father,  we  inquired  how  His  life  and  words  bore 


f 


'  '-If 


8  ' 


I     t 


156 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


!'^  i 


hi-  ■ 


out  the  claim.  Kow,  in  this  third  part  of  the  argu- 
ment, having  satisfied  ourselves  that  these  hooks 
before  us  are  the  very  books  which  come  to  us  with 
prophetic  and  apostolic  authority,  we  now  proceed 
to  inquire  how  far  an  inspection  of  their  contents 
bears  out  their  claim.  And  here  again  we  shall 
follow  the  same  method.  We  shall  raise  the  ques- 
tion as  to  what  we  should  reasonably  expect  of  such 
books;  and  if  we  find  all  reasonable  expectations 
realized,  surely  it  will  be  but  fair  to  grant  that  the 
claim  is  established. 

"What,  then,  may  we  reasonably  expect  of  these 
books,  if  it  be  true  that  they  come  to  us,  not  as 
mere  private  productions,  but  by  inspiration  of 
God? 

1.  We  should  expect  that,  amid  all  diversity  of 
matter  and  of  form,  there  would  be  unity  of  spirit. 
And  is  it  not  so?  Think  for  a  moment  how  appro- 
priate is  the  name  "  Holy  Bible  "  as  a  title  of  the 
entire  collection.  Matthew  Arnold  has  shown  how 
the  idea  of  righteousness  is  the  central  idea  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  he  is  correct  as  far  as  he  goes; 
and  it  is  well  worth  pondering  how  I'ar  this  single 
fact  may  go  toward  proving  the  presence  of  a  di- 
vine element  throughout.  But  the  fact  is  much 
stronger  than  as  Arnold  puts  it,  for  it  is  not  right- 
eousness in  the  common  acceptation  of  the  word, 


III 


THE   ONE   BOOK. 


157 


wliicli  might  readily  be  supposed  to  cover  only  those 
virtues,  which  the  common  conscience  of  mankind, 
always  and  everywhere,  more  or  less  demands;  but 
it  is  holiness,  something  much  higher,  purer,  and 
more  comprehensive,  which  is  the  keynote  of  the 
Bible  from  beginning  to  end.  Even  in  the  rude 
Mosaic  age,  wlien  tlie  state  of  society  was  such,  that 
many  things  far  from  ideally  right  had  to  be  al- 
lowed "  for  the  hardness  of  their  iiearts,"  when 
many  of  the  political  regulations  reflected  the  im- 
perfect spirit  of  the  times,  dealing  as  such  regula- 
tions ought  always  to  deal,  with  the  practicable 
rather  than  the  ideal, — even  then  we  see,  shining  on 
the  mitre  of  the  high  priest,  the  plate  of  pure  gold 
with  this  inscription:  "Holiness  to  the  Lord." 
And  the  attentive  student  iinds  the  conviction 
growing  upon  him  that,  while  the  external  history 
was  very  much  what  would  be  expected  of  the  age, 
and  the  political  regulations  hp-d  to  a  certain  extent 
to  conform  thereto,  yet,  "  the  law  "  proper,  both  the 
moral  and  ceremonial  branches  of  it,  held  up,  as  an 
ideal  before  the  people,  nothing  short  of  perfect 
holiness.  And  the  keynote  struck  by  the  law  is 
followed  out  by  all  the  prophets,  taken  up  in  a  ten- 
derer, sweeter  strain  by  Christ  Himself,  and  pro- 
longed by  the  holy  apostles,  until  at  the  close  of 
the  book  of  Revelation,  we  are  introduced  into  the 


:  i 


If 


158 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


holy  city,  "  whore  there  shall  in  no  wise  enter  any- 
thing that  defileth,''  but  over  wliich  reigns  thc^ 
"Holy,  Holy,  Holy,  Lord  God  Almighty."  Can 
you  fail  to  recognize  the  unity  here?  And, observe, 
it  is  not  mere  unity,  but  a  unity  of  the  most  ele- 
vated kind,  having  the  divine  signet  upon  it;  for, 
indeed,  it  is  a  question  whether  this  idea,  which 
runs  like  a  golden  thread  through  all  the  scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  ever  entered  into 
the  minds  of  the  most  cultivated  nations  of  the 
ancient  world,  or  into  the  mind  of  man  at  all  from 
any  other  source. 

Again,  there  is  not  only  one  purpose,  the  loftiest, 
and  purest,  and  noblest  that  could  be  conceived, 
running  through  all  the  scriptures,  but  there  is  one 
plan  for  the  realizing  of  this  purpose.  When  we 
look  at  the  means  provided  for  leading  men  to  holi- 
ness, we  £nd,  not  a  great  many  different  sugges- 
tions from  different  minds,  as  we  should  expect 
from  authors  so  diverse  in  their  talents,  tempera- 
ments, education,  and  surroundings,  and  so  far  sep- 
arated from  each  other  in  time;  but  one  consistent 
plan  of  a  kingdom  of  God,  the  standard  of  which  is 
holiness,  and  its  method  mercy, — mercy  and  truth 
meeting  together,  righteousness  and  peace  embrac- 
ing each  other,  as  it  is  put  in  the  expressive  lan- 
guage of  the  85th  Psalm.    This  wonderful  unity  is 


THE  ONE   BOOK. 


150 


OHO  wliicli  would  require  volumes  to  develop,  but 
wo  can  only  suggest  it  here. 

And  in  the  same  way  it  will  be  found,  that  all  the 
main  thoughts  which  are  expressed  by  the  different 
authors  on  the  great  subject  of  revelation,  such  as 
God,  man,  duty,  goodness,  sin,  salvation,  instead  of 
presenting  that  conflict  wliich  you  always  find,  when 
human  pliilosophy  without  special  divine  aid  at- 
tempts to  discuss  such  questions,  are  so  fully  in  ac- 
cord that,  as  we  have  seen,  it  is  difficult,  even  for 
those  who  deny  the  divine  element  in  the  scriptures, 
to  avoid  treating  the  whole  as  if  it  were  the  produc- 
tion of  one  man. 

Finally,  there  is  that  most  wonderful  unity  of 
all,  referred  to  by  our  Lord  himself,  which  appears 
when  you  recognize  the  great  fact,  tliat  all  th^^  man- 
ifold witness  of  the  books  converges  on  Ciirist„ 
Here,  again,  the  field  is  too  wide  to  enter  upon; 
but  those  who  examine  it  will  find  it  a  most  fruit- 
ful field  of  investigation.  And  so  conclusive  is  the 
argument  based  upon  it,  that  the  only  thing  infidel- 
ity can  do  in  the  matter  is  to  take  up,  in  succes- 
sion, the  most  striking  passages  which  set  forth  the 
hope  of  a  coming  Savior,  and  explain  them  away  as 
best  it  can — a  task  wliich  must  remain  forever  hope- 
less, for  this  most  weighty  reason,  that  the  ancient 
Jews  themselves  understood  them  in  their  Messianic 


n 


.a>i»e'.--»--*^jwn 


160 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


ill 


sense.  (For  a  full  and  learned  presentation  of  this 
subject,  see  Westcott's  "  Introduction  to  the  study 
of  the  Gospels,"  Chap.  11.)  And  it  only  shows  tiie 
desperate  straits  to  which  infidelity  is  reduced  in 
dealing  with  this  subject,  when  its  advocates  are 
constrained  to  impose  a  forced  and  unnatural  mean- 
ing on  a  whole  series  of  passages  in  different  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  though  the  testimony  of  thoso 
who  lived  nearest  the  time  is  against  them,  and 
though  Christ  Himself,  whom  they  profess  to  re- 
gard as  the  most  intelligent  Jew  of  his  age,  under- 
stood and  expounded  them  as  applying  to  Himself. 
As  for  the  modern  Jews  who  reject  Christ,  they  of 
course  join  with  the  infidels  in  getting  rid  of  those 
passages,  for  the  very  good  reason  that  it  is  only  in 
this  way  that  they  can  reject  the  ^ew  Testament 
while  retaining  the  Old.  Thus,  all  through  the  Old 
Testament,  there  is  a  convergence  of  hope,  looking 
for  the  coming  Christ,  and  all  through  the  "New 
there  is  a  convergence  of  faith,  resting  on  the  Christ 
who  has  c<^me  and  fulfilled  "  the  hope  of  Israel," — 
a  unity  which  fully  harmonizes  with  the  claim  the 
apostle  Peter  advances  on  behalf  of  the  prophets, 
when  he  speaks  of  them  as  "searching  what  or  what 
manner  of  time  the  spirit  of  Christ,  which  was  in 
them,  did  signify,  when  it  testified  beforehand  of 
the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the  glory  that  should 
follow." 


THE   ONE   BOOK. 


161 


Thus,  in  every  way,  the  unity  of  spirit,  which  the 
theory  of  inspiration  calls  for,  is  fully  borne  out  by 
a  careful  inspection  of  the  numerous  books  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments. 

2.  Another  thing  we  should  expect,  if  the  claim 
of  inspiration  is  well-founded;  that,  though  the 
authors,  as  men,  must  necessarily  have  been  moulded 
and  controlled  by  their  times  and  surroundings,  yet 
their  productions  would  have  a  large  element  of 
universal  adaptation  in  them.  And  is  it  not  so?  Is 
it  not  so,  to  a  degree  that  is  altogether  unaccount- 
able, apart  from  some  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God? 

Think,  first,  how  every  part  of  our  complex  nature 
is  powerfully  appealed  to:  the  conscience,  the  intel- 
lect, the  affections,  the  imagination,  the  will.  Eead 
Dr.  Hopkins'  fifth  lecture  on  the  "Evidences,"  if 
you  wish  to  see  how  much  there  is  in  this  one  thing, 
which  we  can  only  mention  in  passing. 

Think,  next,  of  the  adaptation  to  different  classes 
of  men.  Have  not  the  most  cultured  and  the  most 
simple-minded,  the  highest  and  the  lowest,  the  rich- 
est and  the  poorest,  found  here,  as  nowhere  else,  a 
satisfaction  for  the  wants  of  their  natures?  It  is  to 
no  purpose  to  point  to  any  number  of  cultured  per- 
sons who  reject  the  Bible,  and  speak  slightingly  of 
it;  for  the  mere  fact  that  they  reject  it  is  a  sufficient 
reason  why  they  can  not  be  expected  to  appreciate 
11 " 


'  i  V,, 

*  r 


1 


hi  lii!  » 


n 


i!1 


M  P, 


162 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


it.  The  question  is  not,  what  satisfaction  it  gives  to 
those  who  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  it,  but  ho\," 
it  meets  the  wants  of  those  who  put  it  to  the  proof, 
who  take  it  as  a  lamp  to  their  feet  and  a  light  to  their 
path ;  and  it  can  not  be  denied  that,  while  one  of  the 
glories  of  the  gospel  is,  that  it  is  preached  specially 
to  the  poor,  and  another  is,  that  even  the  little  chil- 
dren have  their  portion  in  it,  and  quite  a  large  one 
too,  as  our  Sunday-school  experience  fully  shows, 
many  of  the  most  scholarly  and  highly-cultivated 
of  men  have  confessed  its  unrivaled  adaptation  to 
the  wants  of  their  own  natures. 

Think,  further,  of  its  adaptation  to  all  the  differ- 
ent circumstances  of  life.  All  experienced  Chris- 
tians can  set  their  seal  to  the  following  testimony 
of  Archbishop  Trench,  in  his  lecture  on  the  inex- 
haustibility of  Scripture:  "What  an  interpreter  of 
scripture  is  affliction!  How  many  stars  in  its 
Heaven  shine  out  brightly  in  the  night  of  sorrow 
or  of  pain.  .  .  .  What  an  enlarger  of  scrip- 
ture is  any  other  outer  or  inner  event  which  stirs 
the  deeps  of  our  hearts;  which  touches  us  near  to 
the  core  and  centre  of  our  lives.  Trouble  of  spirit, 
condemnation  of  conscience,  pain  of  body,  sudden 
danger,  strong  temptation — when  any  of  these 
overtakes  us,  what  veils  do  they  take  away  that  we 
may  see  what  hitherto  we  saw  not;  what  new  do- 


THE   ONE   BOOK. 


163 


mains  of  God's  word  do  they  bring  within  our 
spiritual  ken!  How  do  promises,  which  once  fell 
flat  upon  our  ears,  become  precious  now,  psahns 
become  our  own,  our  heritage  forever,  which  before 
were  aloof  from  us!  .  .  .  How  much,  again, 
do  we  see  in  our  riper  age  which  in  youth  we 
missed  or  passed  over.  And  thus,  on  these  accounts 
also,  the  Scripture  is  well  fitted  to  be  our  compan- 
ion and  do  us  good  all  the  years  of  our  life." 
"  Let  us  still  further  think  of  its  adaptation  to 
different  nations  and  races  of  men.  Our  religion 
is  really  the  only  catholic  religion,  our  Bible  the 
only  collection  of  sacred  books,  that  has  proved  its 
adaptation  to  peoples  the  most  widely  separated 
frorii  each  other.  "No  two  civilizations  could  be 
more  widely  separated  than  the  Oriental  civiliza- 
tion, out  of  the  bosom  of  which  the  books  of  the 
Bible  sprang,  and  .  hat  Western  civilization,  which 
is  founded  on  it  and  has  grown  out  of  it.  And  it 
lias  been  proved  to  be  adapted  not  only  to  the  most 
diverse  civilizations,  but  even  to  barbarism  itself; 
for  some  of  the  most  wonderful  trophies  of  the  el- 
evating, purifying,  exalting  influences  of  the  Bible 
have  been  found  among  the  most  degraded  races  on 
the  face  of  the  earth.  The  more  you  investigate  the 
matter,  the  more  you  will  be  convinced  that,  while 
it  was  indeed  true  that  Christ  "came  unto  His 


'■  ;3 


164 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


r.    M 


own  and  His  own  received  Him  not,"  and  though 
many  of  every  nation  to  whom  He  has  come  have 
received  Him  not,  yet  "as  many  as  received  Him," 
of  whatever  nation,  kindred,  people  or  tongue,  "  to 
them  gave  He  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God." 
The  wild  Hottentot,  if  only  he  receives  Christ,  be- 
comes so  elevated  and  purified  thereby,  as  lo  be  in 
a  position  to  vindicate  his  claim  to  be  a  son  of  God, 
as  well  as  the  best  of  us. 

The  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  all  successive  ages 
of  the  world's  history  might  close  this  series,  were 
it  not  that  it  introduces  us  to  a  new  feature  w^hich 
deserves  separate  consideration,  viz.: 

3.  The  progressiveness  of  the  Bible.  The  unity 
of  tone  and  tenor,  of  purpose  and  spirit  and  plan, 
which  we  find  throughout  the  Bible,  is  not  a  dead 
but  a  living  unity.  It  is  a  unity  of  progress,  of  de- 
velopment. There  was  evidently  an  educational  de- 
velopment along  the  line  of  the  Scnpture  history, 
the  study  of  which  is  both  interesting  and  instruc- 
tive. There  was  also  a  germinating  and  springing, 
a  budding  and  blossoming  of  that  hope  of  Israel 
which  found  its  fruitage  in  "  the  fulness  of  the 
time,"  when  God  sent  His  Son  into  the  world. 
There  was  development  of  doctrine,  too,  not  only 
throughout  the  long  ages  of  the  Old  Testament,  but 
even  in  tlie  brief  compass  of  the  ^ew,  as  is  most 


THE   ONE  BOOK. 


165 


beautifiillj  and  convincingly  shown  by 'Bernard,  in 
the  Bampton  Lectures  for  1867. 

And  then,  though  the  canon  has  been  so  long 
complete,  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that,  as  progress 
is  made  in  other  things,  we  are  making  fresh  dis- 
coveries in  the  inexhaustible  mine  of  Scripture. 
Just  as  in  Nature  many  things  continue  hidden 
from  the  ages  and  generations,  until  the  appointed 
time  comes  round,  and  a  Newton  or  an  Edison 
makes  patent  what  has  long  been  latent;  so  is 
it  in  Scripture,  And  thus  it  comes  to  pass,  that 
the  Bible  is  always  in  advance  of  the  age,  just  as 
Nature  is  always  in  advance  of  the  science  of  the 
age.  What  more  characteristic  of  the  advance  of 
religious  thought  in  the  present  century,  than  the 
development  of  that  charity  and  liberality,  which 
for  many  centuries  was  so  conspicuously  absent. 
But  when  we  open  the  Bible,  lo!  there  is  a  charity 
and  liberality,  shining  on  the  face  of  it,  so  brightly, 
that  it  is  almost  incredible  that  centuries  should 
have  passed,  before  it  was  recognized.  It  has  been 
beautifully  suggested,  that  much  of  the  truth  which 
the  Bible  contains  has  been  written,  as  it  were,  with 
sympathetic  ink,  invisible  until  ;he  time  should 
come,  when  the  world  was  ready  to  receive  a  new 
heritage  of  truth.  Tiiis  wonderful  progressiveness 
in  the  Bible  leads  us  to  a  fourth  j)oint,  viz.: 


^ 


^  '■. 


'  :     \t 


i'l  11 .1 


'W 


!i,i  r 


166 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


4.  "What* the  Bible  has  to  say  about  the  future. 
And  here  we  miglit  reasonably  expect,  that  there 
would  be  some  provision  to  meet  that  want  of  our 
njiture,  which  yearns  to  know  something  of  what 
lies  \»  ithin  the  veil.  On  the  other  hand,  we  should 
not  reasonably  expect  that  such  a  revelation  of  the 
future  would  be  given,  as  to  satisfy  an  idle  curiosity. 
Revelation  with  reticence,  then,  is  what  we  should 
expect.  And  is  it  not  even  so?  The  prophetic  ele- 
ment of  scripture  has  for  its  consistent  aim  from 
beginning  to  end,  not  the  gratification  of  a  prying 
curiosity,  but  the  practical  object  of  warning,  guid- 
ing and  comforting  those  to  whom  it  was  given,  and 
supplying  them  with  motives  to  personal  holiness 
and  ardent  devotion  to  the  best  interests  of  their  fel- 
low-men. Hence  an  intentional  vagueness  and  in- 
detiniteness  in  prophetic  language.  But,  notwith- 
standing this,  there  has  been  already  such  a  marked 
fulfilment  of  a  large  number  of  prophecies,  that 
strong  arguments  have  been  founded  on  this  alone, 
for  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  The  constant 
attempt  of  unbelievers  has  been,  to  bring  down  the 
date  of  the  prophecies  so  as  to  give  plausibility  to  the 
supposition  that  the  fulfilment  came  before  the 
prophecy,  or  else  to  explain  the  correspondence  by 
the  notion  of  shrewd  guesses  or  far-sighted  prog- 
nostication ;  but  let  any  one  study  the  subject  can- 


THE   ONE   BOOK. 


167 


can- 


didly and  thoroughly,  and  he  will  see  that,  after  all 
doubtful  cases  are  set  aside,  there  remain  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  unmistakable  prophecies,   which 

could  not  possibly  have  been  written  after  the  event, 
to  support  the  claim  of  inspiration. 

But  the  special  point  now  before  us  has  to  do 
rather  with  that  which  is  still  in  the  future,  and 
especially  with  those  revelations  of  the  world  be- 
yond the  grave,  which  we  find  in  scanty  measure, 
but  in  growing  clearness,  till,  in  tlie  end,  we  rest 
with  delight  on  the  glowing  imagery  of  the  closing 
chapters  of  the  Apocalypse.  Now  if  any  one  will 
contrast  these  reticent  and  reserved  un veilings  of 
the  future  with  the  corresponding  teachings  of  the 
Koran,  for  instance,  or  the  Buddhist  sacred  books, 
the  vast  diiference  will  be  very  apparent.  Here, 
as  everywhere  in  the  Scriptures,  the  moral  impres- 
sion is  everything  ;  the  gratification  of  curiosity, 
or  of  sensual  desire,  nothing. 

The  subject  is  really  exhaustless.  As  we  said  at 
the  outset,  it  requires  some  powers  of  appreciation 
to  begin  with;  but,  given  tliese  powers  of  apprecia- 
tion, and  we  are  confident  that,  the  longer  the  sub- 
ject is  studied,  the  more  will  the  evidences  throng 
around  from  every  side,  that  tliis  is  more  than  a 
collection  of  ordinary  books  bound  together;  that 
they  are  indeed  w^hat  they  claim  to  be — the  work 


'  1,1 


f  t 


168 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


)»: 


of  "  lioly  men  of  old,  who  spake  as  they  were  moved 
by  the  Holy  Ghost." 

And  now  what  is  there  to  he  said  on  the  other  side  ? 
"What  can  the  infidel  bring  forward,  to  counterbal- 
ance the  mass  of  evidence  which  we  have  only  hint- 
ed at  in  the  ^rie^"  t  vay?  A  string  of  objections 
and  difilcultiis,  lovinded  on  particular  passages,  and 
most  of  them  a:  pea'^'ig  to  our  ignorance.  Now, 
we  do  not  say  that  these  objections  and  difficulties 
are  all  paltry.  Far  from  it.  Many  of  them  are. 
Still,  a  considerable  number  are  undoubtedly  hard 
to  deal  with.  But  what  of  that  ?  Is  it  not  just 
what  was  to  have  been  expected? 

Is  Nature  free  from  difficulties  ?  And  jet  does 
the  presence  of  these  difficulties  prove  that  it  is  not 
divine  in  its  origin  ?  There  is  a  superficial  rough- 
ness and  ruggedness  in  many  parts  of  the  Bible,  but 
that  does  not  prove  that  there  are  not  mines  of 
wealth  under  t'  ?  surface,  any  more  than  the  rough- 
ness of  Colorado  proves  it  to  be  a  God-forsaken 
country,  as  some  represented  it  to  be,  before  its 
hidden  riches  w^ere  disclosed.  Just  as  in  the  investi- 
gation of  Nature,  so  in  the  study  of  the  Bible,  labor 
is  needed,  patience  is  needed,  sympathy  is  needed; 
but,  when  these  are  present,  difficulties  rapidly  dis- 
appear, and  if  any  still  remain  hard  and  insoluble, 
yet  having  so  very  much  to  build  a  solid  faith  upon, 


THE   ONE   BOOK. 


109 


moved 

r  side  ? 
terbal- 
Y  huit- 
Bctions 
es,  and 
Now, 
cultiea 
m  are. 
y  hard 
at  just 

3t  does 
;  is  not 
roagli- 
)le,  but 
les  of 
rough- 
rsaken 
)re  its 
ivesti- 
, labor 
eeded; 
ly  dis- 
Dluble, 
I  upon, 


we  can  well  afford  to  wait,  to  suspend  our  judgment 
on  soiiie  points  if  need   be,  feeling  fully  assured 
that  what  we  k.iow  not  now  we  shall  know  hen. 
after. 

Our  treatment  of  so  wide  a  subject  in  limits  so 
narrow  must  necessarily  be  exceedingly  inadequate; 
but  even  little  as  we  have  said,  we  think  we  have 
said  enough  to  show  that,  difficulties  included,  we 
find  these  books  of  the  Old  and  Is  ^\^  Testaments  to 
be  just  what  we  should  reasonal  y  t  .pect  them  to 
be  as  inspired  productions;  uiu-  :herefore,  to  the 
strons:  external  evidence  bro  ^grht  out  in  former 
lectures  must  be  added  the  stiii  stronger  internal 
evidence,  that  these  Scriptures  are  in  verv  deed  the 
oracles  of  God. 


It 


\ : 


i   ! 


'^^■t\: 


i.  ,i'» 


-     \ 


u 


CONCLUDING  CONTRAST 


! 


5r!)C  ^tuo  Strongijolirs.  • 


1  f 


I  t 


'■M 


LECTUEE  XI. 


THE  STRONGHOLD  OP  UNBELIEF. 

Having  finished  our  brief  review  of  the  evidences 
by  which  our  belief  in  the  inspiration  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  sustained,  we  might  take  up  next  the  evi- 
dence furnished  for  the  truth  of  Christianity  by  its 
influence,  as  observed  and  experienced.  This  would 
introduce  us  into  an  entirely  new  field,  where  again 
we  should  find  innumerable  confirmations  of  the 
divine  origin  of  our  holy  religion.  But,  though 
the  field  is  a  very  inviting  one,  our  narrow  limits 
will  not  permit  us  to  enter  it,  covering,  as  it  does, 
the  broad  ground  of  modern  history.  We  may  get 
some  idea  of  how  much  there  is  in  it,  by  reading 
such  a  book  as  the  recent  work  of  Uhlhorn  on  the 
Conflict  of  Christianity  with  Heathenism  in  the 
first  three  centuries. 

We  feel  constrained,  therefore,  to  dismiss  the  sub- 
ject with  one  caution.  It  has  betu  the  fashion  of 
late  years  to  ransack  history,  for  tiie  purpose  of  find- 
ing, and  bringing  out  into  the  boldest  relief,  every- 

(173) 


til-  ■;! 


174 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


thing  that  can  be  made  to  tell  against  the  influence 
of  Christianity.  I  need  not  remind  you  how  the 
imprisonment  of  Galileo,  the  martyrdom  of  Gior- 
dano Bruno,  and  the  burning  of  Servetus,  have  be- 
come the  best  known  events  in  history;  so  much  so 
that  it  seems  strange,  that  many  distinguished  wri- 
ters and  speakers  should  still  see  the  necessity  of 
rehearsing  the  same  stories  for  the  ten- thousandth 
time.  The  burning:  of  witches  must  of  course  be 
added  to  the  catalogue,  and  a  few  other  historical 
items  of  the  same  kind.  It  does  not  take  many  to 
make  up  a  complete  stock  in  trade.  The  caution  I 
mean  to  interpose  is  this,  that  we  be  careful  to  dis- 
tinguish between  what  is  really  due  to  Christ  and 
Christianity,  and  what  is  due  to  entirely  different, 
not  to  say  antipodal  causes,  such  as  ecclesiasticism, 
sectarian  bigotry,  and  "  science,  falsely  so  called," 
not  to  speak  of  the  depravity  of  human  nature, 
which  will  manifest  itself  inside  the  church  as  well 
as  outside  of  it.  It  is  easy  for  a  Draper,  after  de- 
fining Christianity  as  synonymous  with  the  Roman 
church,  to  fasten  some  very  strong  imputations 
upon  it.  It  is  e^s}^  to  array  Religion  against  Sci- 
ence, if,  by  "  Religion,"  you  mean  the  scholastic 
philosophy  in  league  with  the  Ptolemaic  system  of 
astronomy.  Will  any  one  dare  to  say  that  Christ 
would  have  imprisoned  Galileo,  or  that  Bruno  was 


THE   STRONGIIOLi^   OF   UNBELIEF. 


175 


put  to  death  because  Christianity  demanded  it? 
Will  any  one  dare  to  say  that  the  burning  of  Ser- 
vetus,  whosesoever  fault  it  was,  was  in  accord  with 
the  spirit  of  Christianity,  as  taught  by  Christ  Him- 
self and  His  apostles?  Is  our  civilization  to  be 
credited  with  all  the  murders  that  are  committed 
within  its  pale?  Is  the  republican  form  of  govern- 
ment to  be  held  responsible  for  all  the  corruptions 
which  disgrace  it,  when  it  is  put  in  operation 
p.  uong  men  like  ourselves  who,  though  we  belong 
to  the  most  enlightened  nineteenth  century,  are, 
nevertheless,  still  as  liable  as  ever  to  abuse  the  best 
of  things  ?  Why  then  should  Christianity  be  held 
responsible  for  all  the  abuses  which,  though  done 
in  its  name,  have  been  in  direct  opposition  to  its 
spirit  and  teachings? 

The  experimental  argument  is  also  a  very  tempt- 
in  jr  one,  and  the  most  conclusive  of  all  to  those  who 
have  actually  made  the  experiment.  But  we  pass 
this  by  also,  only  remarking  that,  while  it  is  abso- 
lutely conclusive  only  to  those  who  have  tested  it 
themselves,  it  nevertheless  ought  to  have  great  force 
with  all,  in  consideration  of  the  vast  multitude  of 
examples  of  the  elevating  and  sanctifying  power  of 
Christianity.  When  the  advocate  of  a  purely  secu- 
lar morality  can  say  that  "  the  appearance  of  but  a 
single  example  proves  the  adequacy  of  the  belief" 


/ 


■■a 


-^' 


1    i  3 


I 


I'-l 


I  S3  Hi, 

1  11'  i 

■  m' 


1 

i!'   i!  ■.! 

\:rl 

^i 

.11 

1 

1  HI 

',  1,1  :  ' 

'«    a'M 

nil!. 

■ 

\ 

IF" 

176 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


(See  "  Is  Life  Worth  Livingrp.  82),  while  we  think 
he  id  putting  it  too  iitrongly,  and  we  should  never 
think  of  insisting  on  the  adequacy  of  our  belief,  if 
it  had  only  one  or  £>  f  jw  examples  to  sustain  it,  yet, 
surely,  it  may  be  allowed  us  to  say,  that  the  ap- 
pearance of  such  an  innumerable  array  of  examples 
furnishes  a  verj?  strong  confirmation  of  the  adequacy 
of  a  belief,  which  is  at  the  same  time  vouched  for 
by  a  vast  accumulation  of  evidence  from  other  and 
independent  sources. 

Dismissing,  then,  the  argument  from  history, 
and  from  experience,  we  propose  to  deal  now  with 
a  difficulty  which  may  lie  in  many  minds,  and 
which  is  rather  increased  than  diminished  by  a  pre- 
sentation of  the  many  converging  lines  of  evidence. 
It  is  this:  If  the  evidence  is  so  abundant  and  satis- 
factory, why  do  so  many  remain  unconvinced  ?  The 
difficulty  would  not  indeed  be  great,  if  the  unbelief 
could  be  traced  in  all  cases,  as  it  can  in  a  great 
many,  to  dislike  of  the  truth,  or  to  carelessness  and 
inattention,  or  even  to  stupidity.  But  the  skepti- 
cisni  of  the  age  is  not  so  easilj  explained.  After 
you  have  deducted  the  large  number  who  love  dark- 
ness rather  than  light,  ond  the  still  larger  number 
who  are  so  little  interested  in  the  subject  that  they 
do  not  care  to  give  it  any  attention,  there  still  re- 


THE   STKONGHOLD   OF   UNBELIEF. 


177 


mains  a  sufficiently  formidable  array  of  nnbeliev- 
ers  of  good  moral  character,  of  decided  intellectual 
ability,  and  with  all  the  appearance  of  candor,  who 
claim  to  have  examined  tlie  evidences  of  Christiani- 
ty and  found  them  insufficient.  Is  tliere  any  ex- 
planation to  be  given  of  this,  in  harmony  with  what 
we  have  said  as  to  the  strength  of  our  position  ? 

We  might,  indeed,  in  regar  1  to  a  large  part  of 
this  moral  and  cultured  infidelity,  that  which  may 
be  called  the  scientific  skepticism  of  the  age,  call 
attention  to  the  influence  of  theone-sidedness  of  the 
scientific  culture,  which  is  not  balanced  b^^  a  corres- 
ponding  spiritual  development.  If  the  exclusive 
study  of  theology  unfits  a  man,  as  it  certainly  does, 
for  appreciating  the  methods  of  scientific  demonstra- 
tion, why  should  we  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact,  that 
the  exclusive  study  of  science  unfits  a  man  for  ap- 
preciating the  methods  of  spiritual  demonstration? 
But  not  only  is  there  a  tendency  towards  material- 
istic conceptions  of  the  universe,  on  the  part  of  those 
v/ho  are  continually  occupied  with  things  material, 
corresponding  to  the  tendency  in  the  other  direction 
of  the  specialist  in  theology;  but  the  former  is 
much  the  stronger  tendency  of  the  two,  because  it 
is  reinforced  by  the  natural  preference  which  men 
in  general  have  for  that  which  ministers  to  the 
specially  urgent  wants  of  the'owerpart  of  their  na- 
12 


178 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


Ill 


Ml 


' 

\ 

: 

' 

ili  "'  , 
fc  ■ 

jit  i- 

h  ,v. 

: 

1  ii 

%s 

¥ 

'il 

|: 

^ 

Wmm^n  ■ 

i 

: 

Htt 

ture.  The  theologian  may  neglect  science,  but  he 
has  a  body  ^-'hich  he  neglects  at  his  peril,  and  those 
dependent  on  him  have  claims  which  cannot  be  set 
aside;  and  accordingly  perforce  a  large  portion  of 
his  attention  must  be  directed  toward  things  ma- 
terial. But  the  scientific  man  may  neglect  his  spirit- 
ual nature  utterly  without  dying  a  death  which  any 
one  can  see;  he  may  live  day  after  day  and  year  af- 
ter year,  without  cultivating  in  the  slightest  dt-gree 
those  faculties,  by  which  he  is  related  to  God  and 
the  realities  of  the  spiritual  sphere,  and  yet  neither 
himself  nor  family  visibly  suffers  on  account  of  the 
neglect;  and  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  the  one-sided- 
ness  of  the  scientific  big</t  is  much  more  thorough 
than  the  one-sidedness  of  tl>e  theologic  bigot  can 
possibly  be.  In  this  direction  we  are  convinced  lies 
the  explanation  of  a  large  part  of  the  scientific  in- 
fidelity of  the  time. 

But  this  consideration,  we  readily  admit,  does 
not  appiy  with  the  same  force  to  the  historians,  and 
still  less  to  the  theologians,  who  are  found  in  our 
day  in  the  ranks  of  the  unbelieving.  As  to  the 
theologians,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that,  when 
church  and  state  are  so  closely  allied  as  they  are  on 
(Ve  .'Oiitinent  of  Europe,  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
ocv..:|>ants  of  theological  chairs  are  truly  repre^sent- 
e  tn  ''sn  Chri-^lanity  of  the  land.     Many  of  the 


U'i  ) 


I 


but  he 
id  those 
t  be  set 
tion  of 
gs  ma- 

spirit- 
ich  any 
)^ear  af- 
dfgree 
od  and 
neither 
of  the 
-sided- 
:)rough 
ot  can 
ied  lies 
iic  in- 

%  does 
IS,  and 
in  our 
to  the 
,  when 
are  on 
lat  the 
'e^ent- 
of  the 


THE   STRONGHOLD    OF   UNBELIEF. 


179 


utterances  from  the  theological  chairs  have  not  been 
fiom  a  spiritual,  but  from  a  purely  philosophical 
standpoint — a  fact  which  must  be  borne  in  mind 
in  estimating  their  significance  as  signs  of  the  times. 
But  whatever  discount  we  may  have  to  make  from 
the  spiritual  insight  of  such  men,  we  cannot  deny 
their  competency  as  literary  and  historic  critics; 
and  how  is  it  that  they  can  examine  so  thor- 
oughly as  they  seem  to  do.  the  historic  foundations 
of  Christianity,  and  yei:  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  what  we  receive  as  facta  are  only  myths  and 
legends? 

The  answer  to  this  question  will  introduce  us  to 
the  present  stionghold  of  infidelity;  and,  strange  to 
say,  it  is  a  do£  ma,  a  dictum,  an  oracular  utterance 
of  certain  men.  The  dogma  is  this,  that  there  can 
be  no  such  thing  as  a  power  above  nature  made 
known  to  man.  The  supernatural  must  be  got  rid 
of  at  all  hazards,  and  if  facts  seen  to  stand  in  tlie 
way,  so  much  the  worse  for  the  acts,  that  is  all. 
It  is  laid  down  as  a  foundation  rinciple,  that  no 
amount  of  evidence  can  be  ao<  pted  as  proof  of 
anything  supernatural.  Let  l  e  present  a  few  quo- 
tations to  make  the  dogmatism  of  these  skeptics 
apparent.  Strauss,  in  his  Life  o^  Jesus  for  the  Ger- 
man people,  under  the  head  of  "Considerations 
preparatory  to  the  following  Investigation,"  says 


^r 


I 


fi 


<  I 


Till 


li 


180 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


(§23):  "The  miraculous  is  a  foreign  element  in  the 
gospel  narratives  of  Jesus,  which  resists  all  histori- 
cal treatment,  and  the  conception  of  the  myth  is 
the  means  wherehy  we  eliminate  it  from  our  sub- 
ject." Further  on,  under  head  of  "Plan  of  the 
work,"  he  says:  "  Over  and  above  this  peculiar  ap- 
paratus for  causing  miracles  to  evaporate  in 
myths^  criticism  will  avail  itself  of  all  means,"  &c. 
(The  italics  are  not  in  the  original).  You  see  from 
this,  that  ii  was  not  on  historical  but  on  anti -super- 
natural grounds  that  Strauss  based  his  famous  myth- 
ical theory.  He  had  to  get  rid  of  the  miracles  so  as 
to  keep  his  dogma,  and  he  used  the  mythical  theory  as 
the  best  .means  of  getting  rid  of  them.  Kenan,  in  his 
"  Apostles"  (Carleton,  N".  Y.  p.  37),  says  :  "  The 
first  twelve  chapters  of  the  Acts  are  one  tissue  of 
miracles.  !N'ow  one  absolute  rule  of  criticism,  is 
liut  to  allow  any  place  among  historical  accounts  to 
any  miraculous  stories."  Kow  I  ask  in  all  fairness, 
is  this  criticism,  or  is  it  dogmatism?  It  is  true  that 
he  adds:  "nor  is  this  owing  to  a  metaphysical  sys- 
tem, for  it  is  simply  the  dictate  of  observation." 
Here  he  falls  back  on  the  oft  refuted  sophism  of 
Hume,  that  miracles  are  contrary  to  all  expe- 
rience, which  is  a  simple  begging  of  the  question, 
for  it  is  the  very  point  at  issue.  We  say,  that 
miracles  are  not  contrary  to  all  experience,  and  we 


I '  \ 


i 


THE   STRONGHOLD    OF   UNBELIEF. 


181 


point  to  the  experience  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke, 
John,  and  others  who  lived  at  that  time.  But 
all  this  is  quietly  laid  aside.  On  what  grounds  ? 
On  the  grounds  of  historical  criticism  ?  ISTot  at  all. 
But  simply  by  the  repetition  of  the  assertion  that 
miracles  are  contrary  to  all  experience.  If  that  is 
not  dogmatism,  what  is  it  ? 

And  as  it  is  with  the  great  leaders  of  the  German 
and  French  schools  of  so-called  criticism,  so  has  it 
been  in  England  on  the  part  of  those  who  have  fol- 
lowed in  the  wake  of  their  continental  leaders. 
Take  Baden  Powell,  who  may  be  considered  to  have 
struck  the  first  clear  note  *  '■■  England  on  the  sub- 
ject. He  says,  in  his  essay  on  the  study  of  the  evi- 
dences of  Christianity,  ("  Essays  and  Reviews,"  p. 
150):  "  In  an  age  of  physical  research  like  the 
present,  all  highly  cultivated  minds  and  duly  ad- 
vanced intellects  have  imbibed  more  or  less  the 
lessons  of  the  inductive  philosophy,  and  have,  at 
least  in  some  measure,  learned  to  appreciate  the 
grand  foundation  conception  of  universal  law — to 
recognize  the  impossibility  ...  of  any  mod- 
ification whatsoever  in  the  existing  conditions  of 
material  agents,  unless  through  the  invariable 
operation  of  a  series  of  eternally-impressed  conse- 
quences, following  in  some  necessary  chain  of 
orderly  connection,  however  imperfectly  known  to 


,   i] 


«  Si'll 


?;■  Sit,'; 


]||!k! 


18:^ 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


US.  So  clear  and  indisputable  indeed  has  this  great 
truth  become,  so  deeply  seated  has  it  been  now  ad- 
mitted to  be  in  the  essential  nature  of  sensible 
things  and  of  the  external  world,  that  all  philo- 
sophical inquirers  adopt  it  as  a  primary  principle 
and  guiding  maxim  of  all  their  researches."  There 
it  is,  you  see,  quite  honestly  expressed:  they  all 
''adopt  it  as  a  primary  principle  and  guiding 
maxim  of  all  their  researches'^  so  that,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  every  one  can  predict  beforehand  what 
the  result  of  these  researches  must  be.  The 
primary  principle  and  guiding  maxim  of  all  their 
researches  is  that  the  thing  they  are  investigating 
can  not  be  true.  Any  clear-headed  man  can  esti- 
mate the  value  of  these  researches,  so  far  as  the  main 
poim  rt  issue  is  concerned.  Only  it  is  hard  to  avoid 
raising  the  question  :  Why  any  researches  at  all, 
since  the  very  point  in  dispute  is  settled  before  the 
researches  are  begun  ?  But  this  would  be  scarcely 
a  fair  way  of  putting  it,  for  these  men  really  are  not 
investigating  whether  Evangelical  Christianity  be 
true  or  false.  They  have  decided  its  falsehood  be- 
fore they  began;  and  the  real  object  of  their  re- 
searches is  simply  to  determine  v^hich  of  the  many 
hypotheses  of  falsehood  will  be  least  at  variance 
with  those  facts,  which  can  not  be  got  rid  of  by  any 
method  of  "  elimination,"  however  ingenious.     It 


THE   STRONGHOLD   OF   UNBELIEF. 


183 


would  be  a  great  mistake,  for  instance,  to  suppose 
that  when  such  men  as  Strauss  and  Paulus  are  ar- 
rayed against  each  other,  the  one  is  arguing  for  tlie 
truth  and  the  other  for  tlie  falsehood  of  evangelical 
Christianity.  Both  the  one  and  the  other  has  de- 
cided its  falsehood  before  he  began  his  researches; 
and  the  only  dispute  between  them  is  as  to  what 
theory  of  falsehood  will  appear  the  more  plausible. 
These  remarks  will  not  a])ply,  however,  to  such  a 
book  as  "  Supernatural  Keligion,"  which  does  ad- 
dress itself  apparently  with  great  thoroughness  to 
the  question  of  truth  or  falsehood;  but  it  is  a  sig- 
nificant fact  that  though  historical  investigation 
fills  a  large  part  of  the  work,  it  is  not  entered  upon 
until  many  pages  have  been  devoted  to  building 
up  the  strongest  prejudice  against  the  entertaining 
of  the  idea  of  the  supernatural.  And  thus  it  will 
be  found  that,  whether  it  is  so  expressed  or  not,  the 
real  reason  for  rejecting  the  facts  of  the  gospel  is 
the  dogma,  that  miracle^x  can  not  be  admitted  on 
any  consideration,  howeve/  strong  the  evidence  be. 
I  say  "  whether  expressed  or  not,"  because  it  is  now 
getting  to  be  the  fashion  to  say  nothing  about  it, 
but  simply  to  take  it  for  granted  as  an  axiom  that 
no  one  will  ever  dream  of  questioning.  This  is  the 
method  adopted  in  the  latest  productions  of  the 
Leyden  school  of  skepticism,  which  may  be  con- 


k 


184 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


sidered  as  the  consummation  of  rationalistic  doir- 
matiom,  for  their  new  edition  of  the  Bible,  pre- 
pared for  young  people,  who  above  all  others  ouglit 
not  to  be  so  imposed  upon,  does  not  even  suggest 
the  idea  that  there  is  any  question  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  throughout  speaks  of  the  legends  and 
falsehoods  of  every  part  of  the  Bible,  from  Genesis 
to  Bevelation,  just  as  if  there  were  no  longer  ai.y 
who  believed  ev^en  so  well-attested  a  fact  as  the 
Kesurrection  of  the  Lord  1 

•  It  may  be  of  serf  ice  to  give  a  single  illustration 
of  the  way  in  which  the  dogma  controls  the  re- 
searches. Take,  for  instance,  the  question  as  to  the 
date  of  Luke's  gospel.  Alford  examines  the  ques- 
tion (and  every  one  who  is  acquainted  with  his  works 
knows  how  painstaking  he  is  and  how  scrupulously 
honest  in  putting  things  in  the  worst  light  for  his 
own  cause),  and  decides  "A.  D.  50-58  as  the  limits 
within  which  it  was  probable  that  the  gospel  was 
published."  He  examines  the  question  separately 
as  to  the  date  of  the  Acts,  and  decides  for  A.  D.  63. 
Renan,  on  the  other  hand,  fixes  the  date  of  the  Acts 
about  71  or  72.  On  what  ground?  Because  it  was 
evidently  written  after  Luke,  and  Luke  must  have 
been  written  after  A.  D.  70.  But  why  must  Luke 
have  been  written  after  70?  Because  it  contains  a 
prophecy  of  the  destruction   of  Jerusalem,    and 


THE   STRONGHOLD    OF    UNBELIEF. 


185 


pre- 


tlierefore  must  have  been  written  after  the  event ! 
The  reason  of  the  difference  between  Alford  and 
Renan  is  very  apparent.  Alford  examines  on  liis- 
torical  grounds.  Eenan  lias  a  dogma  which  lie 
irinst  maintain  at  all  hazards.  If  a  genuine 
prophecy  were  admitted,  it  would  overthrow  liis 
dogma,  and  accordingly,  to  save  his  dogma,  he 
sacriHces  everything  that  stands  in  his  way.  He 
has  adopted  the  impossibility  of  anything  super- 
human, either  in  knowledge  or  power,  as  "  the 
primary  principle  and  guiding  maxim  of  all  his  re- 
searches," and  as  a  matter  of  course  he  reaches  liis 
foregone  conclusion.  This  illustration  of  the  way 
in  which  prophecy  is  dealt  with,  together  with  those 
which  have  been  given  from  Strauss  and  others,  of 
the  way  in  which  miracles  are  dealt  with,  will  serve 
to  show  what  is  the  real  worth  of  all  this  manipu- 
lation which  goes  by  the  name  of  "  the  higher 
criticism."  Its  strength  is  found  in  the  dogmatic 
assertion  that  nothing  can  by  any  means  be  credited 
which  demands  superhuman  power  or  knowledge  to 
account  for  it.  ' 

"We  are  willing  to  submit  everything  to  criticism. 
There  have  been  those  who  have  planted  themselves 
on  the  dogma  of  inspiration,  and  refused  to  listen  to 
any  critical  examination  of  its  foundations;  but  the 
numbfer  has  bebu  small  at  all  times  among  intelligGut 


; 


)» 


^, 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


^^. 


1.0 


I.I 


S   U&    E2.0 

u 


11-25  III  1.4 


1.6 


w 


^j^'^'^ 


^j" 
^ 


HiotQgraphic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


d 


:0^ 


^ 


<> 


^ 


23  WiST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  MSSO 

(716)  872-4503 


186 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


Christians,  and  is  smaller  still  than  ever.  "We  open 
up  everything  to  criticism,  because  we  have  nothing 
to  conceal.  But  our  opponents,  while  professing  to 
be  the  advocates  of  universal  criticism,  nevertheless 
refuse  to  subject  to  the  criticism  of  reason  that 
dogma  on  which  their  whole  system  rests.  They 
disallow  entirely  the  critical  question,  "TFAy  should 
it  be  thought  a  thing  incredible  that  God  should 
raise  the  dead?"  They  plant  themselves  on  a 
dogma,  which  begs  the  whole  question  at  issue,  and 
then,  following  it  as  a  guiding  maxim,  go  on  with 
their  "  researches."  And  herein  there  is  furnished 
a  quite  sufficient  reason  why,  with  all  their  learning, 
and  all  their  ability,  and  even  all  their  candor,  they 
can  not  accept  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  If 
once  they  would  surrender  their  dogma,  and  listen 
to  the  facts  and  arguments  without  being  controlled 
by  it,  they  would  no  doubt  feel  the  force  of  them, 
as  other  candid  and  intelligent  men  do,  who  are  free 
from  bondage.  Bi^f,  being  bound  hand  and  foot 
with  the  inexorable  necessity  of  eliminating  the 
supernatural,  they  are  compelled  to  choose  among 
the  various  forms  of  unbelief. 

The  truth  is  that  skeptical  theology  is  always 
ruled  by  skeptical  philosophy.  It  was  the  Panthe- 
istic philofiophy  which  ruled  the  speculations  of  the 
great  German  infidels  of  the  last  generation;  it  is 


Vx 


THE   STRONGHOLD   OF   UNBELIEF. 


187 


tlie  philosophy  of  naturalistic  evolution  which  rules 
the  speculations  of  Kuenen  and  his  followers  to-day; 
and,  so  long  as  men  will  bind  themselves  over  to 
be  the  uncompromising  advocates  of  any  human 
philosophy,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  they  will 
be  in  an  attitude  of  mind  for  receiving  at  all  favor- 
ably "  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,"  in  its  simplicity, 
purity  and  beauty.  We  have  much  sympathy  with 
those  who  stumble  at  the  hard  doctrines  and  meta- 
physical  subtleties  which  have  been  often  advanced 
in  the  name  of  Christianity;  but  we  have  none 
whatever  with  those  who,  because  they  are  ordered 
to  do  so  by  a  ready-made  physical  or  metaphysical 
system,  take  the  position  that  no  amount  of  evi- 
dence can  prove  that  such  an  one  as  Jesus  of  !N"az- 
areth  did  anything  beyond  the  power  of  ordinary 
humanity.  We  feel  sure  that  the  progress  of  en- 
lightenment will,  in  due  time,  sweep  away  this 
shallow  dogmatism  from  the  face  of  the  earth. 

The  trouble  with  the  skepticism  of  the  age  is 
that  it  is  not  thorough  enough.  It  questions  ev- 
erything but  its  own  foundations.  If  it  would  only 
question  these,  the  result  would  appear,  and  we  have 
no  doubt  the  day  is  at  hand  when  it  will  be  clearly 
shown,  that  there  is  no  logical  halting  place  between 
absolute  atheism  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  belief  in 
Christ  and  the  great  facts  and  truths  of  Christianity 


;i 


188 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


on  the  other.  And,  as  soon  as  this  issue  is  fairly 
joined,  we  have  no  fear  of  the  outcome,  for  the  sim- 
ple reason  that  we  have  too  much  faith  in  human- 
ity, to  estimate  at  any  large  aggregate  the  number 
of  the  fools  who  will  be  content  to  say,  even  in 
their  hearts,  "  There  is  no  God."  When  people  gen- 
erally discover,  as  sooner  or  later  they  are  sure  to 
do,  that  to  give  up  the  possibility  of  the  manifesta- 
tion of  Divine  agency  in  the  universe,  is  to  give  up 
the  idea  of  a  Father  in  Heaven,  all  that  remains  in 
them  of  goodness,  and  nobility,  and  hopefulness  as 
well,  will  rise  up  in  indignation,  and  scatter  to  the 
winds  both  the  physical  and  the  metaphysical  dog- 
mas on  which  alone  atheism  can  rest  for  support. 


fairly 
Q  sim- 
aman- 
imber 
en  in 
e  gen- 
are  to 
ifesta- 
ive  up 
ins  in 
ess  as 
to  the 
I  dog- 
ort. 


LECTUEE    XII. 

THE  STRONGHOLD  OF  FAITH. 

"  Their  rock  is  not  as  our  Eock,  even  our  ene- 
mies themselves  being  judges."  This  will  be  clear- 
ly seen  when  we  pass  from  the  stronghold  of  un- 
belief to  the  stronghold  of  faith.  "We  have  seen 
that  the  stronghold  of  the  unbelief  of  the  time  is  a 
dogma,  while,  as  will  presently  appear,  the  Christian 
stronghold  is  in  facts.  Unbelievers,  it  is  true,  deal 
largely  in  facts,  but  when  you  trace  their  arguments 
to  their  ultimate  foundation  you  find  dogma  at  the 
bottom.  On  the  other  hand,  while  we  admit  that 
Christians  deal  largely  in  dogmas,  it  is  found  that 
w>en  you  trace  these  dogmas  to  their  ultimate 
foundation,  you  strike  the  bed-rock  of  hard  facts 
that  can  not  be  denied.  For  example,  inspiration 
is  a  dogma;  and  if  we  rested  everything  on  inspira- 
tion,  our  position  would  be  no  better  than  that  of 
the  infidel,  who  rests  everything  on  the  dogmatic 
assertion,  that  there  can  be  no  power  above  nature 
which  can  by  any  possibility  be  made  known  to 

(189) 


■]>t 


^  ^a 


, 


i  J\ 


190 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


man.  But  we  do  not  rest  upon  the  dogma  of  in- 
spiration as  our  foundation,  nor  upon  any  dogma 
whatever,  but  upon  the  Christ  of  history,  a  person 
whose  existence  and  work,  and  superiority  of  char- 
acter, and  commanding  influence  in  the  world's 
history  no  one  can  deny.  And  herein  we  follow 
Christ  Himself,  who  said,  in  words  which  would 
have  been  ridiculous  from  the  lips  of  any  other  man 
that  ever  lived  upon  the  earth,  "  I  am  the  truth." 
Confucius,  Zoroaster,  Plato,  might,  without  the  im- 
putation of  being  fantastic  or  fanatical,  have  said, 
"  I  teach  the  truth,"  but  only  One  could  say,  with- 
out stultifying  Himself  by  the  utterance,  "I  am 
the  truth." 

The  vast  accumulation  of  evidence  for  Christ- 
ian belief  has,  to  a  large  extent,  hindered  even 
Christians  themselves  from  recognizing  where  their 
greatest  strength  lies.  Inasmuch  as  nine-tenths  of 
all  the  attacks  that  are  made  on  Christianity  are 
attacks  on  the  Bible,  the  attention  of  Christian 
apologists  has  been  almost  exclusively  directed  to 
its  defense.  And  their  success  has  been  so  great, 
that  comparatively  few  have  felt  it  necessary  to  go 
back  of  it.  The  Bible  is  such  a  wonderful  book 
that,  even  if  we  could  give  it  no  place  in  history  at 
all,  it  would  commend  itself  to  the  careful  consid- 
eration of  every  thoughtful  man.    Even  though  it 


THE  STRONGHOLD   OF   FAITH. 


191 


set  up  no  claim  to  inspiration,  and  could  show  as 
little  connection  with  any  remarkable  name  in  his- 
tory as  the  Book  of  Mormon  can,  it  would  be  hard 
to  explain  it  without  some  superhuman  theory  of 
its  origin.  If  the  defense  of  the  Bible,  as  a  whole, 
against  infidel  attacks  had  been  more  difficult  or 
less  successful  than  it  has  been,  there  would  have 
been  greater  disposition  to  fall  back  on  the  founda- 
tions on  which  the  Bible  itself  rests.  iNow  it  is 
true  that,  so  far  as  internal  evidence  is  concerned, 
the  position  of  the  defenders  of  the  Scriptures  is 
stronger  than  ever.  The  objections  against  partic- 
ular passages  are  for  the  most  part  the  old  ob- 
jections that  have  done  duty  in  every  generation 
from  the  beginning  till  now,  while  deeper  and  more 
comprehensive  study  has  brought  out  new  beauties 
and  glories,  new  adaptations  and  correspondencies. 
But  inasmuch  as  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures 
is  now  called  in  question  even  by  those  who  admit 
the  wonderful  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the  spirit- 
ual wants  of  man,  it  is  necessary,  especially  in 
these  days,  to  make  it  evident  that  while  we  hold 
as  strongly  as  ever  that  the  Bible  is  its  own  wit- 
ness, we  decline  to  admit  that  it  is  its  only  witness; 
we  maintain  that,  if  i:he  witness  of  the  Bible  to 
itself  is  challenged,  we  can  fall  back  upon  a  Wit- 
ness nobler  still — One  who  stands  acknowledged, 


■'f 


I 


{  n 


?  I 


Vi 


192 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


even  by  the  enemies  of  the  Bible,  as  the  culmination 
of  earth's  greatness,  goodness,  and  nobilitj. 

There  is  evidence  to  show  that  some  even  of  the 
acutest  and  most  learned  of  the  opponents  of  Christ- 
ianity have  not  really  estimated  the  true  strength 
of  our  position.  Take  the  following  passage  from 
the  introductory  chapter  of  "  Supernatural  Kelig- 
ion"  as  an  illustration ;  "  Orthodox  Christians  at 
the  present  day  may  be  divided  into  two  broad 
classes,  one  of  which  professes  to  base  the  Church 
upon  the  Bible,  and  the  other  the  Bible  upon  the 
Church.  The  one  party  assert  that  the  Bible  is  fully 
and  absolutely  inspired;  that  it  contains  God's  rev- 
elation to  man,  and  that  it  is  the  only  and  sufficient 
ground  for  all  religious  belief."  Now  this  is  an 
entire  misunderstanding  and  misrepresentation  of 
our  position.  It  is  a  confounding  of  the  question 
as  to  the  limits  of  inspiration  with  the  question  as 
to  the  grounds  of  inspiration.  "We  are  all  familiar 
with  the  standing  controversy  as  to  whether  the 
Church  rests  on  the  Bible  or  the  Bible  on  the 
Church.  The  latter  is  the  Eoman  Catholic  view, 
while  the  Protestant  theologians  have  taken  the 
position  that  the  Church  derives  her  authority  from 
the  Bible,  not  the  Bible  from  the  Church.  Hence 
the  famous  watchword  (originated  by  Chilling- 
worth,  I  believe),  «  The  Bible  and  the  Bibte  alone, 


THE  STRONGHOLD  OF  FAITH.     193 


nation 

of  the 
Dlirist- 
rength 
5  from 
Relig- 
aus  at 
broad 
yhurch 
on  the 
is  fully 
I's  rev- 
fficient 
;  is  an 
ion  of 
lestion 
ion  as 
miliar 
er  the 
l>n  the^ 
view, 
m  the 
f  from 
Hence 
illing- 
alone, 


the  religion  of  Protestants."  Now  we  are  quite 
willing  to  stand  by  the  motto,  "The  Bible  and 
the  Bible  alone,"  when  the  question  is  as  to  the 
limits  of  that  which  is  authoritative,  when  the  con- 
troversy is  with  those  who  wish  to  impose  decrees 
of  councils  and  ecclesiastical  dogmas  and  traditions 
as  of  equal  authority  with  the  Holy  Scriptures;  but 
it  is  quite  a  different  thing,  when  tlie  question  is  as 
to  the  foundation  of  our  faith,  and  the  controversy 
is  with  those  who  would  take  it  away  from  us  alto- 
gether. We  do  say  that  the  Church  rests  upon  the 
Bible,  but  we  utterly  deny  that  "  the  Bible  is  the 
only  ground  for  all  religious  belief."  We  do  say 
that  "  we  (the  church)  are  built  upon  the  founda- 
tion of  the  apostles  and  prophets"  (the  Bible);  but 
we  do  not  stop  there.  With  the  apostle  we  go  on 
and  say,  "Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  chief 
corner-stone."  And  it  is  satisfactory  to  know  that, 
while  "the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets" 
is  so  strong  tliat  it  has  resisted  all  attempts  to  un- 
dermine it  for  more  than  seventeen  centuries,  the 
corner-stone  is  so  immovable  that  it  not  only  stands 
secure  in  the  estimation  of  all  the  friends  of  Christ- 
ianity, but  "  even  our  enemies  themselves  being 
judges."  There  never  was  or  well  could  be  a  more 
uncompromising  opponent  of  Christianity  than 
John  Stuart  Mill,  and  yet  he  must  (p.  254)  "  place 
13 


it¥i 


i  V'l 


194 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


the  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  even  iu  the  estimation  of 
those  who  liave  no  belief  in  his  inspiration,  in  the 
very  first  rank  of  tlie  men  of  sublime  genius  of 
whom  our  species  can  boast;"  and  iurther  on  lie 
says  "  that  to  the  conception  of  the  rational  skeptic 
it  remains  a  possibility,  that  Christ  actually  was 
what  lie  supposed  Himself  to  be,"  that  He  was  "  a 
man  charged  with  a  special,  express,  and  unique 
commission  Irom  God  to  lead  mankind  to  truth  and 
virtue."  You  may  think  it  strange  that  any  one 
who  would  go  so  far  should  refuse  or  hesitate  to 
go  further;  but  there  is  always  some  reason  which, 
if  we  only  knew  it,  would  explain  all;  and  in  this 
case  there  happens  to  be  something  in  the  very 
same  paragraph  which  is  sufficient  to  explain  it. 
He  has  occasion  to  refer  to  the  gospel  of  John,  which 
he  does  in  terms  implying  the  greatest  contempt; 
and  he  actually  says,  in  regard  to  those  lovely  fare- 
well words  at  the  last  supper,  recorded  in  the  four- 
teenth and  following  chapters,  and  finishing  with 
the  intercessory  prayer — words  which  have  charmed 
the  hearts  of  spiritual  men  in  all  ages  beyond  any- 
thing else  that  was  ever  written  or  read:  "The 
east  was  full  of  men  who  could  have  ntolen  any 
quantity  of  this  poor  stuff !"  What  more  conclu- 
sive proof  could  be  had,  that  the  great  logician  had 
starved  his  spiritual  nature  to  death?    And  it  only 


TliE  STRONGHOLD   OF   FAITH. 


195 


the 

i  of 

1  ho 

ptic 

was 

,8  "a 

iique 

land 
one 

te  to 

hicli, 

\  this 
very 

in  it. 

^hicli 
mpt; 
fare- 
fonr- 
witli 

irmed 
any- 
"The 
any 
nclu- 
nhad 
only 


shows  how  strong  "  our  Kock"  is,  that  a  man  witli 
60  little  power  to  appreciate  spiritual  things  as  this 
would  indicate,  should  feel  constrained  to  speak  in 
such  exalted  terms  as  he  elsewhere  uses  in  reirard  to 
Him  in  whom  our  confidence  is  ultimately  placed. 

"Even  our  enemies  themselves  heing  judges." 
I  believe  it  would  be  very  easy,  by  gathering  to- 
gether the  concessions  made  by  the  great  leaders 
of  the  opposition  to  supernatural  Christianity,  to 
rear  the  entire  structure  which  they  are  trying  to 
demolish.  It  has  been  often  shown,  how  those  dis- 
cussing the  subject  from  different  points  of  view, 
use  arguments  which  are  mutually  destructive;  and 
thus  the  enemies  of  the  truth  devour  one  another, 
and  leave  the  Christ  of  history  standing  in  the 
midst;  and  we  can  well  imagine  Him  there,  looking 
down  with  ineifable  tenderness  and  compassion  on 
the  scene,  while  from  ti ine  to  time  those  loving 
eyes  of  His  are  lifted  up,  as  the  earnest  prayer  ascends 
to  heaven,  "  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not 
what  they  do."  But  it  would  be  interesting  to  show, 
not  only  how  by  their  hostile  arguments  they 
destroy  one  another,  but  how  by  their  various  con- 
cessions they  grant  all  that  is  needed  for  a  solid 
foundation  of  faith. 

If,  as  we  have  seen,  one  uncompromising  op- 
ponent of  Christianity  speaks  of  the  gospel  of  John 


U 


V|i 


,'■7   rl 


196 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


!^' 


1; 
ill 


as  "  poor  stuff,"  which  could  bo  stolen  by  the 
bushel,  another,  who  as  stoutly  denies  the  authen- 
ticity of  that  gospel  and  the  credibility  of  its  author, 
is  yet  constrained  to  write  in  this  way  about  him 
and  it:  "  The  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  has  reached 
a  point  of  development  which  not  only  stands  out 
from  that  of  the  old  Catholic  church  as  the  ideal 
over  against  a  miserably  defective  reality,  but  also 
far  transcends  anything  which  the  Christianity  of 
to-day,  as  a  whole,  has  as  yet  attained  to;  and 
within  the  New  Testament  the  fourth  gospel  must 
be  regarded  as  the  ripest  and  fairest  fruit  of  the 
spirit  of  Jesus."  (Bible  for  Learners,  p.  692.)  And 
if  you  ask  how  a  man,  who  can  speak  in  sucli  lofty 
terms  of  the  fourth  gospel,  can  nevertheless  believe 
that  in  substance  it  is  false  from  beginning  to  end, 
we  can  only  remind  you  that  he  is  one  of  those  who 
has  adopted  the  anti-supernatural  dogma  as  "  a  pri- 
mary principle  and  guiding  maxim  of  all  his  re- 
searches," so  that  he  is  obliged  to  discredit  its  truth 
while  he  cannot  deny  its  beauty,  or  shut  his  eyes  to 
its  superlative  excellence  and  elevation.  So  much 
for  the  theologian,  who  has  some  spiritual  insight, 
but  is  entirely  astray  on  account  of  the  Lad  logic  of 
his  guiding  maxim. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  great  logician  who,  be- 
cause he  is  wanting  in  spiritual  insight,  calls  tlie 


THE   STllONGIIOLD   OF   FAITH. 


197 


►ri- 
re- 
luth 
to 

;ht, 
of 

Ibe- 
tlie 


gos])el  "poor  stuff,"  yet  cannot  but  admit  that  tlio 
gui(lin*i:  maxim  of  the  other  is  illogical,  for  he  says 
(in  his  essay  on  Theism) :  "  Once  admit  a  God,  and 
the  production  by  His  direct  volition  of  an  effect, 
which  in  any  case  owed  its  origin  to  His  creative 
will,  is  no  longer  a  purely  arbitrary  hypothesis  to 
account  for  the  fact,  but  must  be  reckoned  with  as  a 
serious  possibility."  Now,  if  only  Dr.  IlooykaaH 
had  logic  enough  to  see  the  force  of  what  Mill  says 
about  the  supernatural,  his  difficulties  about  the 
credibility  of  the  gospels  would  disappear.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  Mill  had  had  the  S])iritual  insight  of 
Dr.  Hooykaas,  he  could  not  have  rested  in  the  con- 
ception of  the  mere  possibility  of  Christ  being  a 
man  charged  with  a  special,  exj)ress,  and  unique 
commission  from  God.  Thus  the  logic  of  the 
strong  logician  is  on  our  side,  and  the  spiritual  in- 
sight of  the  skeptical  theologian  is  on  our  side;  and 
all  that  infidelity  really  has  to  build  upon,  so  far  as 
these  two  representative  men  are  Cv/ncerned,  is  the 
weak  spirituality  of  the  logician  and  the  weak  logic 
of  the  theologian.  And  so  I  believe  it  would  be 
found,  if  we  were  to  make  a  diligent  and  thorough 
search  all  through  the  ranks  of  the  opponents  of  the 
gospel.  With  the  concessions  of  the  strong  scien- 
tific men,  the  strong  historians,  the  strong  literary 
critics,  the  strong  logicians,  of  the  opposition,  we 


11 


/^ 


198 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


could  construct  a  sufficient  foundation  for  evangeli- 
cal Christianity,  and  crown  it  with  this  motto: 
"  Our  Rock  is  not  as  their  rock,  even  our  enemies 
themselves  being  judges." 

When  Christ  is  presented  as  the  truth,  it  is  very 
hard  to  gainsay  or  resist.  And  it  is  important  to 
remember  that,  all  through  the  "New  Testament,  it 
is  the  personal  historic  Christ  who  is  presented  as 
the  object  of  faith.  It  is  "  believe  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  It  is  true 
that  faith  in  Christ,  if  it  be  genuine,  will  lead  to 
belief  of  the  Bible;  but  in  many  cases  a  very  great 
deal  depends  on  what  is  presented  first.  A  very  in- 
telligent man  of  my  acquaintance  lately  expressed 
his  shrinking  from  Christianity  by  saying:  "  You 
would  make  me  begin  at  the  iirst  of  Genesis  and 
take  it  right  straight  through."  IS'ow  this  is  not 
the  pobition  of  evangelical  Christianity.  It  is  the 
gospel  that  we  insist  upon,  the  gospel  of  Jesus  the 
Christ.  And  many  a  man  that  stumbles  at  many 
hard  things  in  the  Bible  would  find  no  excuse  for 
rejecting  Christ  and  His  gospel.  The  simplicity 
of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  will  commend  itself 
more  or  less  to  all  honest  and  earnest  minds.  And 
then  there  is  not  only  the  simplicity  but  the  vital- 
ity of  the  faith  which  attaches  itself  to  the  person 
Df  Jesus,  and  which  therefore  shows  itself  to  be  not 


/^ 


THE   STRONGHOLD   OF   FAITH. 


199 


a  matter  of  creed,  but  of  life.  Many  men  shrink 
from  systems  ready-made.  Our  systems  of  theology 
may  be  able  to  make  a  very  good  defense  of  them- 
selves, and.  it  would  be  easy  to  show  that  many  of 
those  who  are  the  mofet  bitter  against  systems  of 
theology  have  yielded  a  blind  allegiance  to  ready- 
made  systems  of  philosophy.  But  it  is  important 
to  know  that  we  are  under  no  obligation,  in  dealing 
with  the  foundations,  to  defend  any  system  of  the- 
ology. The  faith  which  is  necessary  to  begin  with 
in  every  case  is  simple  confidence  in  Christ.  It  may 
begin  with  an  idea  no  higher  than  Mill's,  of  Christ 
as  "a  man  charged  with  a  special,  express,  and 
unique  commission  trom  God."  It  seems  very  evi- 
dent that  the  first  disciples  commenced  with  no  high- 
er idea  of  Him  than  this.  Even  Peter,  James  and 
John,  were  no  further  on,  when  they  began  their 
Christian  career.  And  if  the  beginner  in  the  Chris- 
tian life  now  will  only  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,  and  honestly  try  to  profit  by  His 
instructions,  and  keep  His  words  as  these  disciples 
did,  the  result  will  be  the  same.  In  due  time,  to  the 
question,  '*  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am?"  will  come  the 
unhesitating  answer,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  Gml."  We  have  such  confidence  in 
"  our  Eock,"  that  we  have  no  fear  for  any  tliat  will 
only  surrender  themselves  to  His  guidance.    Just 


^ 
•-.\ 


i'i-'. 


200 


THE   FOUNDATIONS. 


as  He  is  able  and  willing  to  pardon  and  restore  the 
greatest  sinner  who  will  only  truly  repent,  bo  is  He 
able  and  willing  to  guide  into  all  truth  those  who 
are  farthest  astray  in  their  conceptions  of  divine 
things,  if  only  they  are  willing  to  be  led  by  Him. 
Let  any  man,  whatever  his  preconceived  opinions 
be,  only  take  up  the  yoke  of  the  Christ  of  the  gos- 
pels and  learn  of  Him;  let  him  take  these  words 
and  that  example  of  His  and  live  by  them  day  by  day, 
and  in  due  time  he  will  be  as  orthodox  as  he  need 
be  on  the  Bible  question,  on  all  questions  of  theol- 
ogy, on  everything  that  is  of  any  consequence. 
"  If  any  man  will  do  His  will,  he  shall  know  of  the 
doctrine." 

In  concluding  these  lectures  I  shall  only  throw 
out  a  suggestion,  on  which  a  volume  might  profit- 
ably be  written.  We  referred  in  the  introductory 
lecture  to  the  cumulative!  nature  of  the  Christian 
evidence,  and  showed  how  unfair  it  was  to  repre- 
sent its  strength  as  that  of  a  chain  which  is  no  strong- 
er than  its  weakest  link.  Now  that  we  have  been 
speaking  of  the  stronghold  of  Christianity,  it  is  im- 
portant to  remind  you  that  the  strength  of  our  po- 
sition is  not  even  measured  by  the  strength  of  our 
strongest  argument.  Strong  as  our  position  is 
when  we  plant  our  feet  simply  on  the  "  Rock  of 
Ages,''  and  take  our  stand  upon  the  unquestionable 


THE  STRONGHOLD   OP   FAITH. 


201 


facts  of  the  life  of  the  Christ  of  history,  it  is  yet 
very  much  strengthened  by  the  convergen'^-^,  of  evi- 
dence from  every  other  point  to  the  central  Kock 
on  which  our  fee'  are  planted ;  and  the  special  suo-- 
gestion  we  have  to  throw  out  is,  the  remarkable 
contrast  between  the  infidel  rock  and  the  Christian 
rock,  as  regards  their  relation  to  all  thr  outlying 
field.  The  conception  of  Christ  as  a  divine  Savior 
adapts  itself  to  all  the  facts  and  phenomena  as  they 
are  presented  to  us  in  history  and  experience.  The 
anti-supernatural  dogma  of  the  opposition  is  so  ill 
adapted  to  any  of  them,  that  the  only  way  in  which 
it  can  be  maintained  is  by  the  "reconstruction"  of 
everything.  The  Christ  of  the  gospels  does  not 
suit  it,  and  so  there  must  be  a  reconstruction  of  the 
life  of  Christ  to  match,  and  we  are  asked  to  take  the 
Christ  of  Strauss',  or  Kenan's,  or  Keim's  imagining, 
instead  of  the  Christ  of  history.  The  Bible  does  not 
suit  it  in  any  part,  and  so  it  must  all  be  reconstructed, 
from  Moses  up  to  John ;  and  so  imperative  has  the 
necessity  become,  that  we  have,  as  the  latest  pro- 
duction of  the  infidel  school,  a  bible  according  to 
Oort  and  Hooykaas,  assisted  by  Kuenen,  to  take  the 
place  of  the  old  Bible  of  history.  And  in  the  same 
way  Baur  and  others  have  been  laboring  to  recon- 
struct the  history  of  the  church.  And  even  that  is 
not  sufiScient,  for  the  very  universe  itself  is  found  to 


9  ii 


i 


'•*-^ 


202 


THE    FOUNDATIONS. 


be  in  need  of  reconstruction,  to  harmonize  with  the 
anti-supernatural  dogma,  and,  accordingly,  not  only 
are  evil  spirits  and  angels  ruled  out  of  existence, 
but  even  God  Himself  is  banished  from  His  uni- 
verse; and  not  only  so,  but  the  spiritual  nature  of 
man  is  resolved  into  mere  vibrations  of  the  brain 
and  nervous  system.  And  the  reconstruction  pro- 
cess does  not  stop  even  here;  for  those  moral  dis- 
tinctions which  were  supposed  to  lie  in  tlie  nature 
of  things  are  included  in  the  all  embracing  mater- 
ial development,  and  we  must  have  new  "  Data  of 
Ethics"  from  the  fertile  brain  of  Herbert  Spencer 
to  take  the  place  of  the  discarded  Law  of  God; 
and  thus  everything,  everything  is  reconstructed  on 
the  basis  of  the  barest  materialism.  Kow,  does  not 
the  necessity  for  such  wholesale  reconstruction  of 
everything  render  that  dogma  of  the  infidel,  which 
calls  for  it  all,  just  a  little  suspicious? 

On  the  other  hand,  take  the  Christian  conception. 
It  harmonizes,  as  we  have  seen,  with  our  own  human 
nature  in  all  its  complexity;  it  harmonizes  with 
those  thoughts  of  God  which  the  best  of  men  have 
had  in  all  ages;  it  harmonizes  with  what  we  cannot 
but  believe  as  to  the  immovable  foundations  of 
right  and  wrong;  it  harmonizes  with  the  gospels  as 
we  find  them,  without  any  manipulation  like  that 
which  is  resorted  to  by  our  imaginative  reconstructs 


THE   STRONGHOLD   OF   FAITH. 


203 


ors ;  it  harmonizes  with  the  Bible  as  it  has  come  down 
to  us  from  the  past;  it  harmonizes  with  the  great 
facts  of  the  history  of  Christianity  in  the  world; 
it  harmonizes  with  individual  Christian  experience; 
it  harmonizes  with  those  hopes  and  aspirations  of 
which  the  best  of  men  are  conscious  in  their  best 
and  purest  moments  And  is  not  all  this  a  mighty 
confirmation  of  its  truth  ?  Let  us  then  by  all  means 
cast  aside  that  miserable  dogma,  which  begins  by 
"eliminating"  the  superhuman  element  from  the 
Life  of  Jesus,  and  ends  by  destroying  the  very 
foundations  of  morality;  and,  with  our  feet  securely 
planted  on  the  "  Kock  of  Ages,"  let  us  still  raise  to 
highest  heaven  the  song: 

**  All  hail  the  power  of  Jesus' name, 
Let  angels  prostrate  fall, 
Bring  forth  the  royal  diadem 
And  crown  Him  Lord  of  all." 

In  the  book  of  Isaiah  (xxviii,  16,)  we  find  this  re- 
markable  prophecy:  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  God, 
Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion,  for  a  foundation,  a  stone,  a 
tried  stone,  a  precious  corner  stone,  a  sure  founda- 
tion :  he  that  believeth  shall  not  make  haste."  This 
prophecy  is  quoted  by  the  apostle  Peter  in  his  epis- 
tle, and  applied  to  Christ  in  these  terms:  "To 
w^iom  coming,  as  unto  a  Living  Stone,  disallowed 
indeed  of  men,  but  chosen  of  God,  and  precious,  ye 


M 


204 


THE  FOUNDATIONS. 


also,  as  lively  stones,  are  built  up  a  spiritual  house." 
In  the  focus  between  these  two  lights,  the  one  cast- 
ing its  rays  forward  and  the  other  backward  on  the 
spot,  lies  the  much  controverted  passage,  which 
records  the  answer  of  the  Master  to  this  same  apos- 
tle, immediately  after  he  has  for  the  first  time  ex- 
pressed his  faith  in  Him  as  "the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  Living  God  ":  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon 
THIS  ROCK  I  will  build  my  Church:  and  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it",  (Matt,  xvi,  18). 
This  is  the  Christian  stronghold ;  and  it  is  the  only 
Stronghold  for  Eternity.  "  Other  foundation  can 
no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ." 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURG  db  CO. 


house." 
me  cast- 
i  on  the 
,  which 
le  apos- 
ime  ex- 
the  Son 
id  upon 
le  gates 
tvi,  IS). 
he  only 
ion  can 
Jhbist." 


IngersoU  and  Moses :  a  replt. 

By  Rev.  Samuel  Ives  Curtiss,  D.  D.,  author  of  "  The 

Levitical  Priests,"  etc.    12mo.    Price,  $1.25. 

"  There  is  nothing  dogmatical  or  violent  in  the  style  of  this  reply. 

It  is  calm,  dignified,  scholarly  and  fair  throughout."— 77^  Tribune. 

"  Dr.  Curtiss  has  done  his  work  well,  and  has  shown  his  opponent  to 
be  equally  destitute  of  scholarship  and  fairness."— GoseM^,  Cindnnati. 

*'  The  author  has  done  very  thorough  work,  and  no  fair  minded 
reader,  even  if  opposed  to  Christianity,  can  deny  its  candor,  accuracy 
or  comp\eteuesaJ'*—Congregationali8t,  Boston. 

"  Prof.  Curtiss,  of  Chicago  Theological  Seminary,  with  his  superb 
stores  of  learning,  has  lately  subjected  himself,  by  answering  IngersoU, 
to  the  charge  of  using  howitzers  to  shoot  sparrows.  He  has  shown  most 
conclusively,  what  no  ma&  of  even  moderate  intelligence  has  ever 
doubted,  that  this  man  is  a  blunderer  of  the  most  irredeemable  kind, 
not  advanced  beyond  poor  outgrown  Paine  in  his  knowledge  of  the 
methods  by  which  Christianity  can  be  attacked."— JS^v.  Joseph  Cook, 
Boston. 

Sent  by  mail,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Publishers, 

Motives  of  Life :  by  peop.  david  swing. 

Author  of  "  Truths  for  To-day."    16mo.    Price,  $1.00. 

"  Remarkable  for  its  simplicity,  eloquence,  earnest  thoughts  and  sin- 
cere pleadings  for  what  is  good  and  best  in  life."— £i;e.  Post,  Hartford. 

"  Prof.  Swing  writes  with  the  simplicity,  the  earnestness  and  the 
honesty  which  come  of  a  sincere  devotion  to  all  that  is  best  and  noblest 
and  purest  in  life  and  character."— -ftT.  Y.  Evening  ^ost. 

"  One  of  the  most  remarkable  features  of  Mr.  Swing's  writings  is  the 
felicity  and  strength  of  their  illustrations.  He  never  loses  himself  in  a 
cloud  of  abstractions.  The  truth  which  he  presents  is  always  surcharged 
with  freshness  and  vitality,  radiant  with  color  and  active  in  move- 
ment."—JV:  r.  Tribune. 

"They  are  distinguished  for  breadth  of  thought,  simplicity  of  struc- 
ture, earnestness  of  aim,  fitness  of  illustration,  and  lofty  views  of  human 
character  and  duty.  It  is  difficult  to  find  about  them  the  slightest  tech- 
n  cal  theological  odor,  but  they  have  a  fragrance  of  their  own  which  is 
much  more  grateful."— GoWen  Rule,  Boston. 

Sent  by  mail,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Publishers. 


I- 


i 

i  I 


'K 
w 


I'   l"'i 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURG  dt  CO. 


Life  of  Benedict  Arnold :   his  patriotism  and  his 

Treason.    By  Hon.  I.  N.  Arnold,  author  of  "  Life  of 
Abraham  Lincoln."  Crown  8vo.,  gilt  top.  Price,  $2.60. 

"  The  author  has  made  a  diligent  study  of  his  sources  of  inform*,  a, 
compared  their  evidence  with  impartiality  and  good  judgment,  ana  p/e- 
sente'l  the  iruits  of  his  research  in  a  compact  and  attractive  narrative.*' 
—Tribune,  New  York, 

*'  The  volume  has  been  completed  with  an  accuracy,  a  candor,  and 
a  thoroughness  worthy  of  the  true  science  of  history,  and  the  publish- 
ers have  done  their  part  of  the  work  superbly.  A  handsomer  volume 
has  never  been  issued  in  the  United  States."— TVmes,  Chicago. 

"  The  biographer  discriminates  fairly  between  Arnold's  patriotism 
and  baseness;  and  while  exhibiting  the  former  and  the  splendid  ser- 
vices  by  which  it  was  illustrated,  with  geuergus  earnestness,  does  not  in 
any  degree  extenuate  the  turpitude  of  the  other.  *  ♦  •  The  investi- 
gation is  not  confined  to  familiar  documentary  evidence,  but  is  assisted 
by  new  nnd  important  supplementary  material  derived  from  manu- 
scripts, letters,  journals,  etc.,  not  generally  accessible."— JEfarper'a  Monthly, 

Sent  by  mail,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Publishera. 


Belle  and  the  Boys:    By  Mrs.  Caroline  F.  Corbin. 

Author  of  "Rebecca;    or  A  Woman's  Secret."     12 
mo.    niustrated.     Price,  $1.25. 

•'  This  book  places  its  author  at  once  among  the  '  gifted  few.'  ^'—Sat. 
Eve.  Herald. 

"  To  the  list  of  good  domestic  stories  must  be  added  '  Belle  and  the 
Boys.'  "—AUantic  Monthly. 

*•  It  seems  just  the  book  to  be  appreciated  by  fa:r,  sweet  young  girls, 
and  b:ave,  manly  boys.  Handsomely  printed  and  illustrated,  it  is  one 
of  the  prettiest  juvenile  books  of  the  ye&T." —American  Bookseller,  N.  Y. 

"  In  that  simplicity  of  style  and  story-telling  knack  which  goes  di- 
rectly to  the  heart  of  every  boy  and  girl,  she  has  much  of  that  power 
possessed  in  so  remarkable  a  degree  by  Miss  Alcott,  with  whose  stories 
Mrs.  Corbin's  creations  may  be  not  improperly  compared.  It  is  thor- 
oughly bright  and  attractive,  and,  with  its  pretty  cover  and  handsome 
illustraions,  will  make  glad  the  hearts  of  many  a  boy  and  girl."— 2'ri- 
bune,  Chcago. 

^ent  by  mail,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Publishers. 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURQ  dt  CO. 

Truths  for  To-Day.  by  peof.  david  swino. 

First  Series  (Fifteen  Selected  Sermons),  Price,  $1.50. 
Second  Series  (Fifteen  Selected  Sermo^),  Price,  1.50. 

"  Fresh  and  manly,  full  of  generous  Christian  feeling,  and  without 
a  taint  of  heresy.  •  •  •  Prof.  Swing  is  not  a  logician,  and  he  relics 
on  heart  and  experience  rather  than  on  argument  as  means  of  conver- 
sion ;  but  he  is  wholly  free  from  sentimuntality ;  his  religion  is  healthy 
and  vigorous,  and  a  reader  of  his  sermons  can  readily  understand  why 
he  is  an  effective  and  persua^^ve  preacher."— ^c/vejti«6r,  Boston. 

"  The  preacher  makes  no  display  of  his  rich  resources,  but  you  are 
convinced  that  you  are  listening  to  a  man  of  earnest  thought,  of  rare 
culture,  and  of  genuine  humanity.  His  forte  is  evidently  not  that  of 
doctrinal  discussion.  He  deals  in  no  nice  distinctions  of  creed.  He 
has  no  taste  for  hair-splitting  subtleties,  but  presents  a  broad  and  gen- 
erous view  of  human  duty,  appealing  to  the  highest  instincts  and  the 
purest  motives  of  a  lofty  manhood."— Aeto  York  IrSmne, 

Sent  by  mail,  post  paid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  he  Publishere, 


A  Short  History  of  France ;  for  Youxa  people. 

By  Miss  KiRKLAND,  author  of  "  Six  Little  Cooks,'* 
and  <*  Dora's  Housekeeping."     12mo.    Price,  $1.50. 

*'  The  little  history  may  be  commended  as  the  best  of  its  kind'that 
has  yet  appeared."— ^w/Win,  Philadelphia, 

"  It  is  not  a  dry  compendium  of  dates  and  facts,  but  a  charmingly 
written  history."— CAmfion  Union,  New  York. 

"  Miss  Kirkland  has  composed  her  '  Short  History  of  France'  In 
the  way  in  which  a  history  for  young  people  ought  to  be  written ;  that 
is,  she  has  aimed  to  present  a  consecutive  and  agreeable  story,  ttora. 
which  the  reader  can  not  only  learn  the  names  of  kings,  and  the  suc- 
cession of  events,  but  can  also  receive  a  vivid  and  permanent  impres- 
sion as  to  characters,  modes  of  life,  and  the  spirit  of  difTerent  periods. 
The  author  has  that  rare  quality  among  writers  of  history,  knowing 
what  to  omit ;  and  appreciates  to  the  full  that  fundamental  rule  for  a 
writer  of  children's  histories-never  to  give  a  proper  name  or  a  date  in 
the  narrative  which  is  not  indispensable.  The  book  is  therefore 
admirably  adapted  to  its  purpose."— JVa^ton,  New  York. 

Sent  by  mall,  >  ost  pat  I,  on  receipt  o'  price  by  tlie  Publi  Jier8. 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURG  dt  CO, 

Memories,    by  max  mollbr. 

Transidied  from  the  German   of   Max   Miiller,  by 
O.P.Upton.    Small  quarto.    Full  gilt.     Price,  |1.60. 

" '  Memories'  is  one  of  the  prettiest  and  worthiest  boolcs  of  the  year. 
The  story  Is  full  of  thrt  indescribable  half  naturalness,  that  effortless 
vralsemblance,  which  is  so  commonly  a  charm  of  German  writers,  and  so 
seldom  paralleled  in  English.  •  •  •  Scarcely  could  there  be  drawn 
a  more  lovely  figure  than  that  of  the  Invalid  Princess,  though  it  is  so 
neirly  pure  spirit  that  earthly  touch  seems  almost  to  profane  her."— 
Spi-ingfield  {Mom.)  Republican. 

*'  It  can  hardly  be  ranked  with  works  of  fiction;  it  does  not  even 
come  under  the  category  of  novellettes,  for  it  is  only  a  pathetic  little 
story ;  but  it  is  more  than  this— it  is  a  prose  poem.  *  *  It  is  seldom 
that  a  powerful  intellect  produces  any  work,  however  small,  that  does 
not  ^  ar  some  marks  of  its  special  bent,  and  the  traces  of  research  and 
philosophy  in  this  little  story  are  apparent,  while  its  beauty  and 
pathos  show  us  a  fresh  phase  of  a  many-sided  mind,  to  which  we 
already  owe  large  debts  of  gratitude." — The  Academy,  London, 
Sent  by  mad,  post-paid,  on  receipt  oS  price  by  the  Publiahera. 

Mane.     Bt  Alex.  Pushkin. 

Translated  from  the  Russian  of  Alex.  P  \shkin,  by  M. 
de  Zielinska.    Small  quarto.     Full  gilt.    Price,  |1.50. 

"  It  is  one  of  the  purest,  sweetest  little  narratives  tha  li  we  have  read 
for  a  long  time.  It  is  a  little  classic,  and  a  Russian  classic,  too.  We 
catch  the  very  breezes  of  the  Steppes,  and  meet,  face  to  face,  the  high- 
Bouled,  simple-minded  FMsaltOi."— Gazette,  Cincinnati. 

"  Pushkin,  the  most  eminent  of  Russian  poets  and  novelists,  is  a 
writer  little  known  in  translations.  He  is  delightfully  introduced  to 
the  American  public  by  his  tale  of  '  Marie.'  The  whole  spirit  and 
atmosphere  of  the  story  is  Aresh  and  bracing,  and  we  promise  the 
readers  of  the  book  a  new  treat."— Aew  York  Independtnt. 

"An  unadorned  record,  told  in  the  most  charming  way,  of  the  ad- 
ventures of  a  young  Russian  officer,  who  sees  service  against  some 
rebels,  and  whose  betrothal  to  the  heroine  forms  the  romantic  part  of 
the  story.  There  is  plenty  of  incident,  and  the  narration  is  so  direct 
and  simple  that  the  reader  becomes  at  once  conscious  of  a  master's 
hand."— Tftc  Nation,  New  York. 

Sent  by  mail,  poat-j^aid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Publitliera, 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURO  dt  CO. 


Madeleine,   bt  jules  sandiau. 

(Crowned  by  the  French  Academy.)  Translated  from 
the  French  of  Jules  Sandeau,  by  Francis  Chariot. 
Small  quarto.    Full  gilt.    Price,  $1.50. 

"  It  is  one  of  the  most  exquisite  love  tales  that  ever  was  written, 
abounding  in  gentle  pathos  and  sparkling  wit,  and  so  pure  in  its  senti- 
ment that  it  may  be  read  by  a  child:*— Eventng  MaU,  Heto  York. 

"  Few  of  the  numerous  translations  from  the  French  which  have 
recently  been  given  to  the  public  will  suit  the  American  taste  as  well 
as  *  Madeleine,'  or  be  perused  with  the  same  unflagging  interest."— 2Vav- 
eller,  Botlon. 

"  More  than  thirty  years  ago  It  received  the  honor  of  a  prize  from 
the  French  Academy,  and  has  since  almost  become  a  French  classic. 
It  abounds  both  in  pathos  and  wit  Above  all,  it  is  a  pure  story,  dealing 
with  love  of  the  most  exalted  kind.  It  is  indeed  a  wonder  that  a  tale 
so  Aresh,  so  Kweet,  so  pure  as  this,  has  not  sooner  been  introduced  to 
the  English-speaking  public."— .GVtfniTi^  Tdegram,  New  York, 

Sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  qf  price  by  the  PuiAUherH. 


Graziella.    bt  a.  di  lamabtin>. 

Translated  fr'om  the  French  of  A.  de  Lamartine,  by 
J.B.  Runnion.   Small  quarto.   Full  gilt.    Price,  $1.60. 

"  It  is  full  of  beautifril  sentiment,  unique  and  graceful  in  style,  of 
course,  as  were  all  the  writings  that  left  the  hands  of  this  distinguished 
French  author."— Post,  Boston. 

"The  beauty  and  purity  of  the  story  have  made  it  a  classic  in  the 
French  language.  In  its  English  dress,  it  has  lost  nothing  of  the  rare 
elegance  and  felicity  of  expression  which  mark  Lamartine's  style."— 
Publishers*  Weekly,  New  York. 

•••Graziella'  is  n  poem  In  prose.  The  subject  and  the  treatment 
are  both  eminently  poetic.  *  ♦  •  It  glows  with  love  of  the  beauti- 
fill  in  all  nature.  •  •  *  It  is  pure  literature,  a  perfect  story,  couched 
in  perfect  words.  The  sentences  have  the  rhythm  and  flow,  the  sweet- 
ness and  tender  fancy  of  the  original.  It  is  uniform  with  '  Memories,' 
and  it  should  stand  side  by  side  with  that  on  the  shelves  of  every  lover 
of  pure,  strong  thoughts,  put  in  pure,  strong  words.  'Graziella'  is  a 
book  to  be  loved."— CAica^^o  Tribu.*e. 

Bent  by  mail,  p-^et-paid,  on  rece'pt  of  price  by  tht  Publithcrs. 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURG  dt  CO, 

Tales  of  Ancient  Greece. 

Bt  THi  RiT.  SiE,  0.  W.  Cox,  Bart.,  M.  A.,  Trtoity 
College,  Oxford.    12mo.    Prioe,  |1.60. 

"  It  ought  to  be  in  the  hands  of  every  scholar  and  of  every  school- 
boy."—So/urday  Sevteto,  London, 

"  It  Is  only  when  we  take  up  such  a  book  as  this  that  we  realize  how 
rich  In  interest  is  the  mythology  of  Greece."— Inquirer,  Philadelphia. 

"Admirable  in  style,  and  level  with  a  child's  comprehension. 
These  versions  might  well  find  a  place  in  every  family."— T/i^  Nation, 
New  York, 

*  "  In  Mr.  Cox  will  be  found  yet  another  name  to  be  enrolled  among 
those  English  writers  who  have  vindicated  for  this  country  an  honora- 
abe  rank  in  the  investigation  of  Greek  hUtory."— fiit7U>T4r^  Review. 

"  It  is  doubtful  if  these  tales,  antedating  history  in  thoir  origin, 
and  yet  flresh  with  all  the  charms  of  youth  to  all  who  read  them  for  the 
first  time,  were  over  before  presented  in  so  chaste  and  popular  form."— 
Oolden  HuU,  Boaton. 

.    SerU  l)j/  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  of  price  by  the  Pubtiahert, 

How  She  Came  Into  Her  Kingdom. 

A  BoMANGB.   By  Mbs.  Cuaelottb  M.  Clabk.   12mo. 
Price,  ^1.50. 

"The  book  reveals  a  fertile  imagination,  superior  dramatic  power, 
keenness  of  thought4n  moralising,  and  specimens  of  description  such 
as  bear  the  stamp  of  genius.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  there  are  paa* 
sages  which  would  do  credit  to  the  pen  of  George  Eliot  or  Charlotte 
Bronte."— Ifominy  Star,  Boston, 

"  A  novel  of  remarkable  intensity  and  originality.  For  wierdness 
and  mysticism  it  can  be  compared  only  with  the  works  of  Bulwer  or 
Hawthorne,  while  its  wonderful  descriptions  of  nature's  convulsions 
resemble  those  of  Jules  Verne.  The  story  itself  is  deeply  interesting, 
and  the  development  of  the  incidents  of  the  plot,  so  full  of  unlooked- 
for  variety,  that  no  definite  idea  of  the  whole  can  be  obtained  except 
by  full  perusal.  *  *  *  It  is  a  long  time  since  we  have  read  a  story 
80  absorbing  and  povrer taV— American  BookseUer,  New  York. 

.  Sent  by  maUt  post-paid,  on  receipt  (^  price  bv  the  PuMiaheri, 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLUItO  dt  CO. 

Six  Little  Cooks  ;  oe,  Aont  jane's  Cookinq  class. 

By  Miss  £.  S.  Kibkland,  author  of  <'  A  Sliort  History 
of  France  "  eto.,  eto.     12mo.     Price,  $1.00. 

"While  it  is  really  an  interesting  narrative  in  itself,  it  dellghtruUy 
teaches  girls  Just  how  to  follow  pracllcally  its  many  recipes."— .b<.  Nio'iO' 
l(u,New  York. 

"This  book  is  the  result  of  a  happy  thought  *  •  A  lucky 
stroke  of  genius,  because  it  is  a  good  thing  well  done.  It  has  tho  charm 
of  a  bright  story  of  real  life,  and  is  a  useful  essay  on  the  art  of  cooking." 
Times,  New  York . 

"  It  is  one  of  the  nicest  possible  little  books  for  young  people.  It  is 
filled  with  capital  recipes,  strung  together  in  the  most  charming  way, 
and  so  simple  that  almost  any  child  could  use  them.  *  *  To  all 
ladies  who  have  children,  and  to  many  who  have  none,  we  commend 
'Six  Little  Cooks*  with  the  greatest  confidence."—- Ltvi/)^  Church,  Chi' 
cago. 

Sent  by  mail,  post-paid  on  receipt  qf  price  by  the  Publiafiers. 


Dora's  Housekeeping. 

By  Miss  E.  S.  Kiukland,  author  of  '<A  Short  His- 
tory of  France,"  etc.,  etc.     12mo.    Price,  $1.00. 

"  It  occupies  a  hitherto  untilled  field  in  literature,  and  girls  and 
their  mothers  will  be  equally  delighted  with  it.*'— The  Advance,  Chicago. 

"  We  cordially  recommend  these  two  little  books  ('  Dora's  House- 
keeping* and  'Six  Little  Cooks'),  as  containing  the  whole  gospel  of 
domestic  economy."— r/*«  Nation,  New  York. 

"  It  is  intended  for  girls  in  their  early  teens,  and  so  appetizing  are 
the  recipes,  that  they  would  almost  turn  an  anchorite  into  a  cook.  In 
short,  one  can't  look  over  the  book  without  getting  hwagrj,"— Tribune, 
New  York. 

"Wisemothers,  of  that  excellent  sort  who  make  the  household  a 
well  ordered  kingdom,  will  appreciate  the  worth  of  such  a  story,  and 
its  fitness  for  presentation  to  daughters  who  are  in  training,  after  the 
good  old  sensible  plan,  for  the  proper  performance  of  the  daily  duties 
of  life."— Evening  Post,  New  York. 

Smit  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  qf  price  by  the  Fublisheri, 


PUBLISHED  BY  JANSEN,  McCLURQ  db  CO. 


Camnock's  Choice  Readings. 

For  Public  and  Private  Entertainment.  Edited  by 
Prof.  Robert  MoLaim  Cumnooe,  Northwestern  Uni- 
versity.   Large  12mo.    Price,  $1.75. 

"  It  ought  to  become  a  special  favorite  among  school  and  college 
students  and  public  readers."— Eventng  Post,  New  York* 

"  Taking  into  account  the  admirable  type,  the  excellent  taste,  the 
brevity  of  the  rhetorical  counsels,  the  unsurpassed  variety,  vre  prefer 
Prof.  Cumnock's  book  to  every  manual  of  the  kind."— Christian  Eegiater, 
Boston, 

"The  volume  consists  in  a  great  measure  of  f^esh  specimens  that 
have  recently  found  their  way  into  current  literature,  and  present  the 
charm  of  novelty  with  the  merit  of  good  writing.  The  ancient  stream 
is  thus  enriched  with  supplies  h:om  new  fountains,  and  living  produc- 
tions take  the  place  of  the  veteran  pieces  which  have  grown  old  in  the 
course  of  protracted  service."— avi&itne,  New  York. 

Sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  qf  price  by  the  Publishers. 

The  Primer  of  Political  Economy. 

In  sixteen  Definitions  and  forty  Propositions.  By 
A.  B.  Mason  and  J.  J.  Lalob.  12mo.  Goth. 
Price,  60  cents. 

" '  The  Primer'  contains  what  ought  to  be  known  in  regard  to  polit- 
ical economy  by  every  school-boy  and  voter."— T/ic  Naiiofn,  New  York. 

"It  treats  with  clearness  wealth,  capital,  wages,  strikes,  demand 
and  supply,  money,  credit,  tariff  and  cognate  subjects,  givng  only  in 
the  briefest  form  laws  and  proofe."— Harpers  Weekly. 

"  We  venture  to  believe  that  not  a  quarter  of  the  men  in  the  Lower 
House  of  Congress  know  as  much  about  political  economy  as  can  be 
learned  from  this  compact  and  interesting  little  treatise."— CArwttan 
Register,  Boston. 

"We  are  not  acquainted  with  any  work  extant  that  presents  these 
principles  with  the  brevity  and  the  clearness  of  •  The  Primer.'  ♦  *  • 
The  authors  of  this  book  re  christen  their  subject  the '  fascinating' 
science.   Their  method  makes  the  name  good."— Tribune,  Chicago. 

Sent  by  mail,  po0t-pau{,  on  receipt  qf  price  by  the  PubUehen, 


